research methodology literary studies

Chapter Four: Theory, Methodologies, Methods, and Evidence

Research Methods

You are viewing the first edition of this textbook. a second edition is available – please visit the latest edition for updated information..

This page discusses the following topics:

Research Goals

Research method types.

Before discussing research   methods , we need to distinguish them from  methodologies  and  research skills . Methodologies, linked to literary theories, are tools and lines of investigation: sets of practices and propositions about texts and the world. Researchers using Marxist literary criticism will adopt methodologies that look to material forces like labor, ownership, and technology to understand literature and its relationship to the world. They will also seek to understand authors not as inspired geniuses but as people whose lives and work are shaped by social forces.

Example: Critical Race Theory Methodologies

Critical Race Theory may use a variety of methodologies, including

• Interest convergence: investigating whether marginalized groups only achieve progress when dominant groups benefit as well
• Intersectional theory: investigating how multiple factors of advantage and disadvantage around race, gender, ethnicity, religion, etc. operate together in complex ways
• Radical critique of the law: investigating how the law has historically been used to marginalize particular groups, such as black people, while recognizing that legal efforts are important to achieve emancipation and civil rights
• Social constructivism: investigating how race is socially constructed (rather than biologically grounded)
• Standpoint epistemology: investigating how knowledge relates to social position
• Structural determinism: investigating how structures of thought and of organizations determine social outcomes

To identify appropriate methodologies, you will need to research your chosen theory and gather what methodologies are associated with it. For the most part, we can’t assume that there are “one size fits all” methodologies.

Research skills are about how you handle materials such as library search engines, citation management programs, special collections materials, and so on.

Research methods  are about where and how you get answers to your research questions. Are you conducting interviews? Visiting archives? Doing close readings? Reviewing scholarship? You will need to choose which methods are most appropriate to use in your research and you need to gain some knowledge about how to use these methods. In other words, you need to do some research into research methods!

Your choice of research method depends on the kind of questions you are asking. For example, if you want to understand how an author progressed through several drafts to arrive at a final manuscript, you may need to do archival research. If you want to understand why a particular literary work became a bestseller, you may need to do audience research. If you want to know why a contemporary author wrote a particular work, you may need to do interviews. Usually literary research involves a combination of methods such as  archival research ,  discourse analysis , and  qualitative research  methods.

Literary research methods tend to differ from research methods in the hard sciences (such as physics and chemistry). Science research must present results that are reproducible, while literary research rarely does (though it must still present evidence for its claims). Literary research often deals with questions of meaning, social conventions, representations of lived experience, and aesthetic effects; these are questions that reward dialogue and different perspectives rather than one great experiment that settles the issue. In literary research, we might get many valuable answers even though they are quite different from one another. Also in literary research, we usually have some room to speculate about answers, but our claims have to be plausible (believable) and our argument comprehensive (meaning we don’t overlook evidence that would alter our argument significantly if it were known).

A literary researcher might select the following:

Theory: Critical Race Theory

Methodology: Social Constructivism

Method: Scholarly

Skills: Search engines, citation management

Wendy Belcher, in  Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks , identifies two main approaches to understanding literary works: looking at a text by itself (associated with New Criticism ) and looking at texts as they connect to society (associated with Cultural Studies ). The goal of New Criticism is to bring the reader further into the text. The goal of Cultural Studies is to bring the reader into the network of discourses that surround and pass through the text. Other approaches, such as Ecocriticism, relate literary texts to the Sciences (as well as to the Humanities).

The New Critics, starting in the 1940s,  focused on meaning within the text itself, using a method they called “ close reading .” The text itself becomes e vidence for a particular reading. Using this approach, you should summarize the literary work briefly and q uote particularly meaningful passages, being sure to introduce quotes and then interpret them (never let them stand alone). Make connections within the work; a sk  “why” and “how” the various parts of the text relate to each other.

Cultural Studies critics see all texts  as connected to society; the critic  therefore has to connect a text to at least one political or social issue. How and why does  the text reproduce particular knowledge systems (known as discourses) and how do these knowledge systems relate to issues of power within the society? Who speaks and when? Answering these questions helps your reader understand the text in context. Cultural contexts can include the treatment of gender (Feminist, Queer), class (Marxist), nationality, race, religion, or any other area of human society.

Other approaches, such as psychoanalytic literary criticism , look at literary texts to better understand human psychology. A psychoanalytic reading can focus on a character, the author, the reader, or on society in general. Ecocriticism  look at human understandings of nature in literary texts.

We select our research methods based on the kinds of things we want to know. For example, we may be studying the relationship between literature and society, between author and text, or the status of a work in the literary canon. We may want to know about a work’s form, genre, or thematics. We may want to know about the audience’s reading and reception, or about methods for teaching literature in schools.

Below are a few research methods and their descriptions. You may need to consult with your instructor about which ones are most appropriate for your project. The first list covers methods most students use in their work. The second list covers methods more commonly used by advanced researchers. Even if you will not be using methods from this second list in your research project, you may read about these research methods in the scholarship you find.

Most commonly used undergraduate research methods:

• Scholarship Methods:  Studies the body of scholarship written about a particular author, literary work, historical period, literary movement, genre, theme, theory, or method.
• Textual Analysis Methods:  Used for close readings of literary texts, these methods also rely on literary theory and background information to support the reading.
• Biographical Methods:  Used to study the life of the author to better understand their work and times, these methods involve reading biographies and autobiographies about the author, and may also include research into private papers, correspondence, and interviews.
• Discourse Analysis Methods:  Studies language patterns to reveal ideology and social relations of power. This research involves the study of institutions, social groups, and social movements to understand how people in various settings use language to represent the world to themselves and others. Literary works may present complex mixtures of discourses which the characters (and readers) have to navigate.
• Creative Writing Methods:  A literary re-working of another literary text, creative writing research is used to better understand a literary work by investigating its language, formal structures, composition methods, themes, and so on. For instance, a creative research project may retell a story from a minor character’s perspective to reveal an alternative reading of events. To qualify as research, a creative research project is usually combined with a piece of theoretical writing that explains and justifies the work.

Methods used more often by advanced researchers:

• Archival Methods: Usually involves trips to special collections where original papers are kept. In these archives are many unpublished materials such as diaries, letters, photographs, ledgers, and so on. These materials can offer us invaluable insight into the life of an author, the development of a literary work, or the society in which the author lived. There are at least three major archives of James Baldwin’s papers: The Smithsonian , Yale , and The New York Public Library . Descriptions of such materials are often available online, but the materials themselves are typically stored in boxes at the archive.
• Computational Methods:  Used for statistical analysis of texts such as studies of the popularity and meaning of particular words in literature over time.
• Ethnographic Methods:  Studies groups of people and their interactions with literary works, for instance in educational institutions, in reading groups (such as book clubs), and in fan networks. This approach may involve interviews and visits to places (including online communities) where people interact with literary works. Note: before you begin such work, you must have  Institutional Review Board (IRB)  approval “to protect the rights and welfare of human participants involved in research.”
• Visual Methods:  Studies the visual qualities of literary works. Some literary works, such as illuminated manuscripts, children’s literature, and graphic novels, present a complex interplay of text and image. Even works without illustrations can be studied for their use of typography, layout, and other visual features.

Regardless of the method(s) you choose, you will need to learn how to apply them to your work and how to carry them out successfully. For example, you should know that many archives do not allow you to bring pens (you can use pencils) and you may not be allowed to bring bags into the archives. You will need to keep a record of which documents you consult and their location (box number, etc.) in the archives. If you are unsure how to use a particular method, please consult a book about it. [1] Also, ask for the advice of trained researchers such as your instructor or a research librarian.

• What research method(s) will you be using for your paper? Why did you make this method selection over other methods? If you haven’t made a selection yet, which methods are you considering?
• What specific methodological approaches are you most interested in exploring in relation to the chosen literary work?
• What is your plan for researching your method(s) and its major approaches?
• What was the most important lesson you learned from this page? What point was confusing or difficult to understand?

Write your answers in a webcourse discussion page.

• Introduction to Research Methods: A Practical Guide for Anyone Undertaking a Research Project  by Catherine, Dr. Dawson
• Practical Research Methods: A User-Friendly Guide to Mastering Research Techniques and Projects  by Catherine Dawson
• Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches  by John W. Creswell  Cheryl N. Poth
• Qualitative Research Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice  by Michael Quinn Patton
• Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches  by John W. Creswell  J. David Creswell
• Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners  by Ranjit Kumar
• Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques  by C.R. Kothari

Strategies for Conducting Literary Research Copyright © 2021 by Barry Mauer & John Venecek is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Handbook to Literary Research

Edited by Delia da Sousa Correa and W.R. Owens The Handbook to Literary Research is a practical guide for students embarking on postgraduate work in Literary Studies. It introduces and explains research techniques, methodologies and approaches to information resources, paying careful attention to the differences between countries and institutions, and providing a range of key examples. This fully updated second edition is divided into five sections which cover: • Tools of the trade-a brand new chapter outlining how to make the most of literary resources; • Textual scholarship and book history-explains key concepts and variations in editing, publishing and bibliography; • Issues and approaches in literary research-presents a critical overview of theoretical approaches essential to literary studies; • The dissertation-demonstrates how to approach, plan and write this important research exercise; • Glossary-provides comprehensive explanations of key terms, and a checklist of resources. Packed with useful tips and exercises and written by scholars with extensive experience as teachers and researchers in the field, this volume is the ideal handbook for those beginning postgraduate research in literature. Delia da Sousa Correa is Senior Lecturer in English at

Related Papers

anita nur azizah

Anthony Adams

This course will introduce graduate students to the most essential methods and standards for research in graduate literary studies. Students will be expected to demonstrably advance from amateur toward quasi-professional status during the scope of the course. Assignments will include historical and analytical bibliographies, state-of-the-field research presentations, and analyses of scholarship history and field formation. Students will be encouraged to pursue research in those fields they find themselves most motivated by; however, a range of literary and historical materials and methods will be covered, possibly including but not limited to manuscript culture, early printed books and book history, textual editing, the archive, the article, the review, the abstract, and the production and management of digital materials.

Emelia Samanhyia

Question: The Setting of a literary work contributes to the development of characters and themes, among other relevance. Examine this notion with reference to at least two of the texts studied in this course.

wassila Rouabah , Linda Tint

A Reader's Guide to Contemporary Literary Theory is a classic introduction to the ever-evolving field of modern literary theory, now expanded and updated in its fifth edition. This book presents the full range of positions and movements in contemporary literary theory. It organises the theories into clearly defined sections and presents them in an accessible and lucid style.

Javed Hussain Khan

Drawing upon Hillway’s three types of research, this paper seeks to take a look at the nature and scope of literary research. It focuses on early works on the subject: Altick (1950, 1963), Sanders (1951), and Bateson (1972) – to demonstrate how some facts lying there can be uncovered through a slightly different reading of these texts. It highlights the similarities that make literary criticism, literary research, and literary scholarship synonymous, if not the same. It ends by mentioning briefly the approaches and methods of literary research.

Jean-Pierre Devroey

Markéta Gregorová

Lesson 5 in a one-term course of academic writing. The course aims at providing students with basic instruction in essay writing, with a special emphasis on literary critical essays. The students are guided through all the stages involved in the process of writing, ranging from choosing the topic to compiling a bibliography. The course deals with a logical structure of the essay, its unity and coherence, with using secondary sources as well as with the issue of plagiarism. Other topics include the suitable language and style and formal requirements in academic writing.

CENTRAL ASIAN JOURNAL OF LITERATURE, PHILOSOPHY AND CULTURE

Urvashi Kaushal

Zeeshan Ali

Anthony J CASCARDI

Sorry, this document isn't available for viewing at this time.

In the meantime, you can download the document by clicking the 'download' button above., related papers.

Proceedings of the 11th …

Sagar Kumar

Neurosurgery

David Haldeman

Geophysical Journal International

Nikolaos S Melis

Welding Journal

Americo Scotti

nayeemulla khan

International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology

Arslan Malik

Revista Noctua

Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Indonesian Legal Studies (ICILS 2018)

MUHAMMAD ABDULSHAHEED MUSA

International Journal of Housing Policy

Meaghan Stiman

International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems

sobhi baniardalani

Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Chemia

Claudiu Man

CIMEL: Ciencia e Investigación Médica Estudiantil Latinoamericana

efrain padilla sanchez

Revista Investigaciones y Aplicaciones Nucleares

Valeria Galeano

The Spine Journal

Andrew Hecht

Classifier ensemble and synthetic minority oversampling technique for academic performance prediction

ABDULAZEEZ YUSUF

I Congreso Internacional de Ingeniería Aplicada a la Innovación y Educación - Asamblea General de ISTEC (Córdoba, Argentina, 20 al 22 de noviembre de 2019)

Analía Guzman

Veterinary world

ANKIT SINGH

Valeriu Beiu

Biuletyn Polskiej Misji Historycznej

Leszek Zygner

Marine Pollution Bulletin

Robert Risebrough

Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association

Matthew Shortus

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

Alex Vaisman

Contemporary Aesthetics

Mickaella Perina

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Search Modern Language Association

Log in to Modern Language Association

• Annual Report
• MLA News Digest Archive
• Mission and Strategic Priorities
• Advertising
• Join the MLA Mailing List
• The MLA Staff
• Delegate Assembly
• Executive Council
• Related Organizations
• Donate to the MLA
• Leading Contributors to the MLA
• MLA Webinars Site
• ADE-ALD Summer Seminar and MAPS Leadership Institute
• MLA Convention Seminars
• Presidential Theme for the 2025 Convention
• 2025 Convention Program Forms
• A Letter from MLA Executive Director Paula M. Krebs Urging Support of Convention Attendance
• MLA Exhibit Hall
• Access Guidelines for MLA Convention Session Organizers and Presenters
• Calls for Papers
• Policies for Forums and Allied Organizations
• Procedures for Organizing Convention Meetings
• Exhibiting at the 2025 MLA Convention
• Sponsorship and Marketing
• Convention History
• Appropriate Conduct at the MLA Annual Convention
• Membership Benefits
• Join the MLA
• MLA Academic Program Services
• MLA Newsletter
• MLA Strategic Partnership Network
• Member Resources
• Member Search
• Renew Your Membership
• MLA Handbook Plus
• Buy the MLA Handbook
• MLA Style Support
• Publications
• Backlist Titles
• Forthcoming Titles
• Library Subscriptions
• What We Publish
• What We Value
• How to Propose a Volume
• Contribute to a Book in Development
• Request Your Complimentary MLA Handbook
• About the MLA International Bibliography
• Free Online Course
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Submitting Work to the MLA International Bibliography
• Tutorial Videos
• Using the MLA International Bibliography
• A Video from Paula Krebs about Humanities Successes
• Executive Council Actions
• MLA Pathways
• Resources on Academic Freedom, Free Speech, and the Right to Protest
• Resources on Collective Action
• 2024 MLA Institutes on Reading and Writing Pedagogy
• Career Resources
• Conferences, Fellowships, and Announcements
• MLA Grants and Awards
• MLA Professional Development Webinars
• MLA Sit and Write Sessions
• MLA Webinars on the Public Humanities
• Reimagining Humanities Coursework for Career Readiness: A Workshop
• MLA Language Map
• Reports and Professional Guidelines

LOOKING TO UPDATE YOUR SYLLABUS?

Our new titles catalog for the 2023–24 academic year is now available!

MLA Guide to Undergraduate Research in Literature

Second edition.

• Authors: Elizabeth Brookbank, H. Faye Christenberry
• Published: 2023
• ISBN: 9781603296298 (Paperback)

This product is not yet available. We are currently accepting preorders for this forthcoming title.

Add to Cart

• Description

What makes a good research topic in a literature class? What does your professor mean by “peer-reviewed” sources? What should you do if you can’t find enough material? This approachable guide walks students through the process of research in literary studies, providing them with tools for responding successfully to course assignments.

Written by two experienced librarians, the guide introduces the resources available through college and university libraries and explains how to access the ones a student needs. It focuses on research in literature, identifying relevant databases and research guides and explaining different types of sources and the role each plays in researching and writing about a literary text. But it also contains helpful information for any student researcher, describing strategies for searching the web to find the most useful material and offering guidance on organizing research and documenting sources with MLA style.

Extensively updated and revised, the second edition emphasizes digital resources that can be accessed remotely, offers critical thinking strategies for evaluating sources, and includes more information on writing about audiovisual as well as written works.

• Digital Pedagogy
• Writing and Research Guides

Introduction (1)

1. Starting the Research Process (5)

Understanding Your Research Paper Assignment (6)

Developing a Topic (11)

Developing a Search Strategy (13)

The Research Process: Five Top Tips for Doing Better Research (19)

2. Searching Your Library Discovery System or Catalog (25)

Is This like Google ? Your Library’s Discovery System (27)

The Library’s Special Language: Library of Congress Subject Headings (32)

Moving beyond the Basics (33)

Using Materials from Other Libraries (39)

Choosing the Right Library Sources for Your Assignment (41)

3. Searching Subject-Specific Databases (43)

How to Select the Right Database (44)

Subject-Specific Databases (47)

Advanced Searching in the MLA International Bibliography (50)

Interdisciplinary Databases (52)

4. Searching the Internet (59)

Finding Scholarship on the Internet (60)

Accessing Scholarship Online (63)

Searching Smarter: Search Engine Advanced Tools (65)

Evaluating Internet Sources (67)

Evaluating Library Sources (71)

5. Finding Reviews (75)

6. Using Contextual Primary Sources (83)

What Is a Primary Source? (83)

Periodicals as Primary Sources (85)

Audiovisual Media as a Primary Source (86)

Using Primary Sources in Literary Research (86)

Finding Primary Sources Using a Library Database or Catalog (89)

Finding Primary Sources Using the Internet (91)

7. Finding Background Information (95)

Library Sources for Biographical and Historical Information (96)

Internet Sources for Biographical and Historical Information (101)

Finding a Definition or the Source of a Quotation (106)

8. Managing Sources and Creating Your Bibliography (111)

Creating In-Text Citations and a Works-Cited List (112)

Organizing Your Research (116)

9. Guides to Research in Literature Written in English (121)

Harner’s Literary Research Guide (122)

Series on Literary Research from Scarecrow Press (123)

Appendix. A Selected Bibliography of Research Sources for Literature and Literary Studies in English (125)

Glossary (143)

Index (149)

Search Bookstore

Browse subjects, browse periods, browse series, related links.

• Author Resources
• 2020–21 Catalog
• 2021–22 Catalog
• 2022–23 Catalog
• 2023–24 Catalog
• Writing and Research Titles Catalog
• Join Our Mailing List
• Course, Bulk, and International Book Orders
• Request a Desk, Exam, or Review Copy

• Master's programmes in English
• For exchange students
• PhD opportunities
• All programmes of study
• Language requirements
• Application process
• Academic calendar
• NTNU research
• Research excellence
• Strategic research areas
• Innovation resources
• Student in Trondheim
• Student in Gjøvik
• Student in Ålesund
• For researchers
• Life and housing
• Faculties and departments
• International researcher support

Språkvelger

Course - research methods in literature studies - litt3001, course-details-portlet, litt3001 - research methods in literature studies, examination arrangement.

Examination arrangement: Home examination Grade: Letter grades

Course content

This course will provide insight into central methodological issues within the field of literature studies. A primary goal is to give students an understanding of the diversity of methods that characterizes literary criticism. The course aims to train students in developing research questions and to assess the applicability and relevance of different research methods, thus providing them with the foundation for developing individual master's projects. The course will provide students with understanding of the connections between critical perspectives and methodological approaches.

Among others, the course will discuss the following topics:

- Methods for examining the relationship between literature and society, literature and history, author and text, and questions related to the literary canon

- Methods for examining the relationship between literature and form, genre and thematics

- Methods for examining the relationship between literature, reading and reception

- The use of physical and digital archives

- Methods for researching literature and education

Learning outcome

Candidates who have passed this course

• have the knowledge to evaluate the applicability and relevance of different research methods in the research of others as well as in their own
• can develop research questions in literature studies and at the same time describe what methods may be applicable to examine various problems
• can discuss how different approaches to literature may result in different interpretations of the same text
• are able to apply terms in, and knowledge of, literature studies in practical work with literature
• are able to find and evaluate literary criticism

Learning methods and activities

Lectures/seminars. The course is taught in English or Norwegian. Students are expected to participate actively in the lectures/seminars for example by presentations, comments and other contributions. Students are required to use the course learning platform regularly.

Obligatory assignment: A written assignment in groups where students discuss different methodological choices in working with a literary text. An approved obligatory assignment is valid for 2 semesters (the semester in which the approval is given, plus the following semester).

Compulsory assignments

• 1 written assignment (in groups)

Further on evaluation

The course is assessed by a written home examination (approx. 4000 words, 5 days). The exam must be answered in Norwegian or English.

Recommended previous knowledge

Relevant undergraduate courses in literature.

Required previous knowledge

At least 7.5 credits (studiepoeng) of courses in literature at ENG2000-, FRA2000-, NORD2000-, or TYSK2000-level.

Course materials

A pensum consisting of 700-800 pages of articles/chapter excerpts focused on research methods, plus a limited selection of short literary texts. Curriculum/reading list will be made available at the beginning of the semester.

Credit reductions

• Blackboard - AUTUMN-2021

Version: 1 Credits:  7.5 SP Study level: Second degree level

Term no.: 1 Teaching semester:  AUTUMN 2023

Language of instruction: Norwegian

Location: Trondheim

• English Literature
• French Literature
• Comparative Literature
• Scandinavian Language and Literature
• Scandinavian Literature
• German Literature

Department with academic responsibility Department of Language and Literature

Examination

Examination arrangement: home examination.

Release 2023-11-30

Submission 2023-12-05

Release 2024-03-04

Submission 2024-03-08

• * The location (room) for a written examination is published 3 days before examination date. If more than one room is listed, you will find your room at Studentweb.

For more information regarding registration for examination and examination procedures, see "Innsida - Exams"

More on examinations at NTNU

Methodological Approaches to Literature Review

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 09 May 2023
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Dennis Thomas 2 ,
• Elida Zairina 3 &
• Johnson George 4  

494 Accesses

The literature review can serve various functions in the contexts of education and research. It aids in identifying knowledge gaps, informing research methodology, and developing a theoretical framework during the planning stages of a research study or project, as well as reporting of review findings in the context of the existing literature. This chapter discusses the methodological approaches to conducting a literature review and offers an overview of different types of reviews. There are various types of reviews, including narrative reviews, scoping reviews, and systematic reviews with reporting strategies such as meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Review authors should consider the scope of the literature review when selecting a type and method. Being focused is essential for a successful review; however, this must be balanced against the relevance of the review to a broad audience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Akobeng AK. Principles of evidence based medicine. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90(8):837–40.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Alharbi A, Stevenson M. Refining Boolean queries to identify relevant studies for systematic review updates. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(11):1658–66.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

Article   Google Scholar  

Aromataris E MZE. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. 2020.

Google Scholar  

Aromataris E, Pearson A. The systematic review: an overview. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(3):53–8.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Aromataris E, Riitano D. Constructing a search strategy and searching for evidence. A guide to the literature search for a systematic review. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(5):49–56.

Babineau J. Product review: covidence (systematic review software). J Canad Health Libr Assoc Canada. 2014;35(2):68–71.

Baker JD. The purpose, process, and methods of writing a literature review. AORN J. 2016;103(3):265–9.

Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326.

Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):1–12.

Brown D. A review of the PubMed PICO tool: using evidence-based practice in health education. Health Promot Pract. 2020;21(4):496–8.

Cargo M, Harris J, Pantoja T, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 4: methods for assessing evidence on intervention implementation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:59–69.

Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376–80.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(5):380–7.

Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB. Conceiving the research question and developing the study plan. In: Cummings SR, Browner WS, Hulley SB, editors. Designing Clinical Research: An Epidemiological Approach. 4th ed. Philadelphia (PA): P Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007. p. 14–22.

Eriksen MB, Frandsen TF. The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. JMLA. 2018;106(4):420.

Ferrari R. Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing. 2015;24(4):230–5.

Flemming K, Booth A, Hannes K, Cargo M, Noyes J. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 6: reporting guidelines for qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:79–85.

Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26(2):91–108.

Green BN, Johnson CD, Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. J Chiropr Med. 2006;5(3):101–17.

Gregory AT, Denniss AR. An introduction to writing narrative and systematic reviews; tasks, tips and traps for aspiring authors. Heart Lung Circ. 2018;27(7):893–8.

Harden A, Thomas J, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:70–8.

Harris JL, Booth A, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;97:39–48.

Higgins J, Thomas J. In: Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3, updated February 2022). Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.: Cochrane; 2022.

International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO). Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ .

Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med. 2003;96(3):118–21.

Landhuis E. Scientific literature: information overload. Nature. 2016;535(7612):457–8.

Lockwood C, Porritt K, Munn Z, Rittenmeyer L, Salmond S, Bjerrum M, Loveday H, Carrier J, Stannard D. Chapter 2: Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global . https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-03 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Lorenzetti DL, Topfer L-A, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than medline for rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30(2):173–8.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, the PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for (SR) and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;6:264–9.

Mulrow CD. Systematic reviews: rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309(6954):597–9.

Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):143.

Munthe-Kaas HM, Glenton C, Booth A, Noyes J, Lewin S. Systematic mapping of existing tools to appraise methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative research: first stage in the development of the CAMELOT tool. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19(1):1–13.

Murphy CM. Writing an effective review article. J Med Toxicol. 2012;8(2):89–90.

NHMRC. Guidelines for guidelines: assessing risk of bias. Available at https://nhmrc.gov.au/guidelinesforguidelines/develop/assessing-risk-bias . Last published 29 August 2019. Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

Noyes J, Booth A, Cargo M, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 1: introduction. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018b;97:35–8.

Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, et al. Cochrane qualitative and implementation methods group guidance series – paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018a;97:49–58.

Noyes J, Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, Tunçalp Ö, Shakibazadeh E. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform guidelines on complex interventions: clarifying the purposes, designs and outlining some methods. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(Suppl 1):e000893.

Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Healthcare. 2015;13(3):141–6.

Polanin JR, Pigott TD, Espelage DL, Grotpeter JK. Best practice guidelines for abstract screening large-evidence systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Res Synth Methods. 2019;10(3):330–42.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7(1):1–7.

Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. Brit Med J. 2017;358

Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Br Med J. 2016;355

Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283(15):2008–12.

Tawfik GM, Dila KAS, Mohamed MYF, et al. A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Trop Med Health. 2019;47(1):1–9.

The Critical Appraisal Program. Critical appraisal skills program. Available at https://casp-uk.net/ . 2022. Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

The University of Melbourne. Writing a literature review in Research Techniques 2022. Available at https://students.unimelb.edu.au/academic-skills/explore-our-resources/research-techniques/reviewing-the-literature . Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

The Writing Center University of Winconsin-Madison. Learn how to write a literature review in The Writer’s Handbook – Academic Professional Writing. 2022. Available at https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/reviewofliterature/ . Accessed 29 Aug 2022.

Thompson SG, Sharp SJ. Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Stat Med. 1999;18(20):2693–708.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):15.

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

Yoneoka D, Henmi M. Clinical heterogeneity in random-effect meta-analysis: between-study boundary estimate problem. Stat Med. 2019;38(21):4131–45.

Yuan Y, Hunt RH. Systematic reviews: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(5):1086–92.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre of Excellence in Treatable Traits, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute Asthma and Breathing Programme, Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Dennis Thomas

Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia

Elida Zairina

Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Parkville, VIC, Australia

Johnson George

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johnson George .

Section Editor information

College of Pharmacy, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar

Derek Charles Stewart

Department of Pharmacy, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, United Kingdom

Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Thomas, D., Zairina, E., George, J. (2023). Methodological Approaches to Literature Review. In: Encyclopedia of Evidence in Pharmaceutical Public Health and Health Services Research in Pharmacy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50247-8_57-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50247-8_57-1

Received : 22 February 2023

Accepted : 22 February 2023

Published : 09 May 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-50247-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-50247-8

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Biomedicine and Life Sciences Reference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

Library Research Guide for Folklore and Mythology

• Theory and Methods

What is Research?

Practicing folklore.

• Research Design & Tools

Research Theories and Methods

• Ethical Guidelines in Different Disciplines
• Searching HOLLIS
• Databases & Bibliographies
• Encyclopedias
• Dictionaries
• Tale-Type and Motif Indices
• Archives & Special Collections
• Material Culture
• Audiovisual Materials & Musical Scores
• Requesting & Accessing Materials
• Organizing and Managing Your Resarch
• Learning With the Library

Research  is the systematic investigation of a subject, topic, or question. 

Data  is the information gathered during research.

Fieldwork  is the collection of data in its natural environment.

A white paper is a report or guide that synthesizes a complex topic or question and the state of information and ideas about it.

Scholarship  is, broadly, the activity of a scholar. More specifically though, the term refers to the writings of scholars which result from their research. The scholarship of a field or discipline are the books, articles, etc. which have been written on the field or discipline, or on a specific subject, topic, or question in the field or discipline.  

What is a theory?

A  theory  is the conceptual basis of a subject or area of study. It is the ideas which underlie how something is understood and the framework within which it is studied.  

What is a method?

A  method  is the process or tool used to collect data.

There are three method types: qualitative, quantitative, and historical. Likewise, some research uses mixed methods.

Qualitative research  is interested in the specific. It studies things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them, endeavoring to understand human behavior from the perspective of the individual.

Qualitative methods  collect data through observation. Qualitative methods include text analysis, interviews, focus groups, observation, record keeping, ethnographic research, case study research.

Qualitative data is descriptive. Qualitative data cannot be precisely measured and is, rather, analyzed for patterns and themes using coding. Qualitative data includes narratives, recordings, photographs, oral histories, etc.

Quantitative research  is interested in the general. It studies general laws of behavior and phenomena across different settings and contexts. This type of research endeavors to form conclusions about social phenomena, collecting data to test a theory and ultimately support or reject it.

Quantitative methods  collect data through measuring. Quantitative methods include experiments, surveys, questionnaires, statistical modeling, social networks, and demography.

Quantitative data  is numerical and statistical. It is data that can either be counted or compared on a numeric scale. Quantitative data includes statistical information. 

Historical research  is interested in the past. It reviews and interprets existing data to describe, explain, and understand past actions or events.

Historical methods  collect and analyze existing data and analyze it. Historical methods include text analysis, cultural analysis, visual analysis, archival research.

Historical data  is data which was created in the past. Historical data includes scholarship, records, artifacts.  

A methodology  is the rationale for the research approach and the methods used. It is based upon the theories underlying the field or discipline of the research.

Library of Congress YouTube Feed: Folklore

The American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress produces videos about the practice of folklore, featuring interviews with a variety of folklorists about their careers, methods, fieldwork experiences, and the implications and applications of their work.

Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches

John W. Creswell 2014, fourth edition

Research Design: Quantitative, Qualitative, Mixed Methods, Arts-Based, and Community-Based Participatory Research Approaches

Patricia Leavy 2017

• Literatures
• Linguistics
• Anthropology
• Human Geography

Cultural Studies

Folklore studies, literary studies.

Literary Studies, also called Literary Criticism, is the study of the written works of cultures, societies, groups, and individuals. Literary Studies examines the place of literature in society, and explores how we conceptualize and describe the world and ourselves.  

Literary Theories

There are a number of different theories about literature, why and how it is created. These theories influence how a work of literature is analyzed, interpreted, and understood. Literary Studies most often uses the method of textual analysis.

Linguistic Studies

Linguistics is the study of languages and their structures. Linguistic Studies examines how language is created and constructed, how it functions and is learned, and how we conceptualize and structure our world through our words.   

Language Theories

There are different theories about the creation and purpose of language. Some theories state that language is the result of the nature of society, while others emphasize the role of humans in constructing meaning. Linguistic Studies use methods such as textual analysis, ethnographic research, statistical modeling.

History Studies

History is the study of events, and their related ideas, individuals, and objects. History Studies examines how moments in time are connected, and how we make sense of things that happen.

Historiography  is the study of how historians have interpreted and written about historical events, in essence, how they perceive history itself. Traditionally, a historiography was a name for a history, literally a specific "writing of history".  

History Theories

There are many different theories about if and how events are related to one another, and these theories have influenced how history has been written about over the centuries. History Studies use methods such as textual analysis and archival research.

A related theory to history theories is Memory Theory , which considers how collective and individual memory is created and preserved. Memory Studies examines the ways in which events are recorded and remembered, or, alternatively, forgotten, and how we choose to create and remember (or forget) our past.

Anthropological Studies

Anthropology is the study of human societies, their behaviors and cultures. Anthropological Studies examine how societies are formed and function, and the many aspects which form our identities.

Social Anthropology  examines human behavior. Sometimes this sub-field is combined with Cultural Anthropology as Sociocultural Anthropology.

Cultural Anthropology  examines the cultures, or various beliefs and practices, of societies. Sometimes this sub-field is combined with Social Anthropology as Sociocultural Anthropology.

Physical Anthropology , also called Biological Anthropology, examines the biology of humans and how they interact with their environment.

Linguistic Anthropology  examines the place of language in shaping social life.

Archaeology  examines the material culture, or the objects, of humans. It is considered a sub-field of Anthropology in the United States, and a sub-field of History in other parts of the world.  

Ethnography is the study of a specific society using the methods of observation and immersion, or talking and living with individuals in order to understand them.   

Anthropological Theories

The is a long tradition of theories about how societies organize themselves and how they function. These theories determine how cultural beliefs and practices are understood, in essence, how we understand ourselves and others. Anthropology Studies use methods such as interviews, focus groups, observation, ethnographic research, and record keeping, as well as textual analysis and archival research.

Sociological Studies

Sociology is the study of societies, their behaviors, relationships, and interactions. It examines social order and social changes, trying to understand how and why we organize ourselves and relate to one another.

Historical Sociology   is the study of the behaviors and organization of societies of the past.   

Sociological Theories

There are different theories about how societies are structured and why they act the way they do. Sociological Studies often use the methods of surveys, experiments, ethnographic research, and textual analysis.

Sociological theories are theories about how the mechanics of societies function, whereas  Social Theory  encompasses more broadly theories which explain how societies think and act.

Geography Studies

Geography is the study of land, inhabitants, and natural phenomena. It examines the relationship between humans and their environment, and helps us to understand our relationship with the world. 

Human Geography  examines humans and their communities, and their relationships with place, space, and environment.

Physical Geography  examines the processes and patterns of environments, such as their atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, and geosphere.

Cartography  is both the study of and the science and art of map-making. It reveals how we view and conceptualize the world and our relationship to it and to others.   

Geography Theories

There are a number of theories as to the relationship between humans and their environments, many of which are shared with the fields of Anthropology and Sociology. Geography Studies use a variety of research methods, including interviews, surveys, observation, and GIS or spatial analysis.

Cultural Studies is the study and analysis of culture. It is a cross-disciplinary field which examines the various aspects of a society, in order to understand how we form our identities. 

Culture  is the ideas, behaviors, customs, and objects of a region, society, group, or individual. 

Material culture   are the physical objects of a culture, such as tools, domestic objects, religious objects, works of art.  

Cultural Theories

Cultural theories draw upon theories in a variety of fields, including literary theories, semiotics, history theories, anthropological theories, social theories, museum studies, art history, and media studies. Cultural theories influence how we analyze and interpret the culture of societies. Cultural Studies tends to use methods such as interviews, observation, ethnographic research, record keeping, archival research, textual analysis, visual analysis.

Folklore Studies, also known as Folkloristics, is the study of the expressions of culture, particularly the practices and products of a society. Folklore Studies examines the things we make to understand how they make us.

Folklore  has been traditionally considered, narrowly, as the oral tales of a society. More broadly, the term refers to all aspects of a culture – beliefs, traditions, norms, behaviors, language, literature, jokes, music, art, foodways, tools, objects, etc.  

Folklore Theories

A number of theories have emerged over the years about how societies create themselves, and these theories influence how we view and understand the things which societies create. Folklore Studies use methods such as interviews, focus groups, observation, ethnographic research, and record keeping, as well as textual analysis, visual analysis and archival research.

Arts Studies

The arts are a range of disciplines which study, create, and engage with human expression. The arts include,

• Architecture -- Design
• Visual Arts -- Drawing, Painting, Illustration, Sculpting, Ceramics, Photography, Film
• Literary Arts -- Fiction, Drama, Poetry, Creative Writing, Storytelling
• Performance Arts -- Music, Dance, Theatre
• Textile Arts -- Fashion
• Craft -- Weaving, Woodwork, Paperwork, Glasswork, Jewelry-making
• Culinary Arts -- Cooking, Baking, Chocolate-making, Brewing, Wine-making
• Art History and Criticism

The arts are a collection of areas of studies which combine technical skills and creativity to produce objects which convey human experience.

Architecture  is the study and design of structures. It examines both the utilitarian and the sociological aspects of space, and the relationship between constructed space and humans. 

Art History  is the study and analysis of visual arts. 

Musicology  is the study and analysis of music.

Performance   is the study and the practice of art is time and space. 

Film & Media Studies  is the study of art which employs technologies.   

Art Theories

There are as many theories about the arts as there are areas of arts. These theories affect how we understand the identity and the agency of the artist, the meaning of the art, and the relationship between the art and society. Arts fields often employ textual and visual analysis research methods, as well as observation and experimentation. 

Folklorists study people's lives and thus they are responsible to preserve and protect culture. Folklorists are professionals and researchers and thus they have a responsibility to the field to uphold standards of behavior and work. Finally, folklorists interact with individuals and are responsible to uphold human rights. Though there is little direct legislation governing folklore studies, there are numerous laws concerning human rights and information, as well as professional standards in the field of cultural heritage preservation. 

Legislation

The codes of ethics and standards which govern folklore studies have been developed over time from a number of authorities.  

1948    United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

1948    American Anthropological Association, Resolution on Freedom of Publication

1971    American Anthropological Association, Principles of Professional Responsibility Statement of Ethics

1976    American Folklife Preservation Act (P.L. 94-201)

American Folklife Center established at the Library of Congress and given duty to preserve American folklife

1985    UNESCO, Protection of Expressions of Folklore Against Illicit Exploitation and Other Prejudicial Actions

1988    American Folklore Society, Statement of Ethics

1988    National Association for the Practice of Anthropology, Ethical Guidelines for Practitioners

1989    UNESCO, Recommendation on the Safeguarding of Traditional Culture and Folklore

1998    American Anthropological Association, Code of Ethics

2003    UNESCO, Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage

Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity

Ron Iphofen, editor 2020

The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects

David B. Resnik 2018

The Ethics of Cultural Heritage

Tracy Ireland & John Schofeld 2014

Critical Ethnography

D. Soyini Madison 2005

Ethics in Ethnography

Margaret D. LeCompte & Jean J. Schensul 2015

The Ethics of Social Research

Joan E. Sieber, editor 1982

Research Ethics for Human Geography

Helen F. Wilson & Jonathan Darling, editors 2021

The Ethics of Cultural Studies

Joanna Zylinska 2005

Museum Collection Ethics

Steven Miller 2020

Theorizing Folklore from the Margins

Solimar Otero & Mintzi Auanda Martínez-Rivera, editors 2021

• << Previous: Background
• Next: Searching HOLLIS >>

Except where otherwise noted, this work is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which allows anyone to share and adapt our material as long as proper attribution is given. For details and exceptions, see the Harvard Library Copyright Policy ©2021 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College.

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

Literature Review  is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

Argumentative Review      This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply imbedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews.

Integrative Review      Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication.

Historical Review      Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical reviews are focused on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review      A review does not always focus on what someone said [content], but how they said it [method of analysis]. This approach provides a framework of understanding at different levels (i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches and data collection and analysis techniques), enables researchers to draw on a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection and data analysis, and helps highlight many ethical issues which we should be aware of and consider as we go through our study.

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

Theoretical Review      The purpose of this form is to concretely examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review help establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Aug 21, 2023 4:07 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

• Methodology
• Open access
• Published: 11 October 2016

Reviewing the research methods literature: principles and strategies illustrated by a systematic overview of sampling in qualitative research

• Stephen J. Gentles 1 , 4 ,
• Cathy Charles 1 ,
• David B. Nicholas 2 ,
• Jenny Ploeg 3 &
• K. Ann McKibbon 1  

Systematic Reviews volume  5 , Article number:  172 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

51k Accesses

26 Citations

13 Altmetric

Metrics details

Overviews of methods are potentially useful means to increase clarity and enhance collective understanding of specific methods topics that may be characterized by ambiguity, inconsistency, or a lack of comprehensiveness. This type of review represents a distinct literature synthesis method, although to date, its methodology remains relatively undeveloped despite several aspects that demand unique review procedures. The purpose of this paper is to initiate discussion about what a rigorous systematic approach to reviews of methods, referred to here as systematic methods overviews , might look like by providing tentative suggestions for approaching specific challenges likely to be encountered. The guidance offered here was derived from experience conducting a systematic methods overview on the topic of sampling in qualitative research.

The guidance is organized into several principles that highlight specific objectives for this type of review given the common challenges that must be overcome to achieve them. Optional strategies for achieving each principle are also proposed, along with discussion of how they were successfully implemented in the overview on sampling. We describe seven paired principles and strategies that address the following aspects: delimiting the initial set of publications to consider, searching beyond standard bibliographic databases, searching without the availability of relevant metadata, selecting publications on purposeful conceptual grounds, defining concepts and other information to abstract iteratively, accounting for inconsistent terminology used to describe specific methods topics, and generating rigorous verifiable analytic interpretations. Since a broad aim in systematic methods overviews is to describe and interpret the relevant literature in qualitative terms, we suggest that iterative decision making at various stages of the review process, and a rigorous qualitative approach to analysis are necessary features of this review type.

Conclusions

We believe that the principles and strategies provided here will be useful to anyone choosing to undertake a systematic methods overview. This paper represents an initial effort to promote high quality critical evaluations of the literature regarding problematic methods topics, which have the potential to promote clearer, shared understandings, and accelerate advances in research methods. Further work is warranted to develop more definitive guidance.

Peer Review reports

While reviews of methods are not new, they represent a distinct review type whose methodology remains relatively under-addressed in the literature despite the clear implications for unique review procedures. One of few examples to describe it is a chapter containing reflections of two contributing authors in a book of 21 reviews on methodological topics compiled for the British National Health Service, Health Technology Assessment Program [ 1 ]. Notable is their observation of how the differences between the methods reviews and conventional quantitative systematic reviews, specifically attributable to their varying content and purpose, have implications for defining what qualifies as systematic. While the authors describe general aspects of “systematicity” (including rigorous application of a methodical search, abstraction, and analysis), they also describe a high degree of variation within the category of methods reviews itself and so offer little in the way of concrete guidance. In this paper, we present tentative concrete guidance, in the form of a preliminary set of proposed principles and optional strategies, for a rigorous systematic approach to reviewing and evaluating the literature on quantitative or qualitative methods topics. For purposes of this article, we have used the term systematic methods overview to emphasize the notion of a systematic approach to such reviews.

The conventional focus of rigorous literature reviews (i.e., review types for which systematic methods have been codified, including the various approaches to quantitative systematic reviews [ 2 – 4 ], and the numerous forms of qualitative and mixed methods literature synthesis [ 5 – 10 ]) is to synthesize empirical research findings from multiple studies. By contrast, the focus of overviews of methods, including the systematic approach we advocate, is to synthesize guidance on methods topics. The literature consulted for such reviews may include the methods literature, methods-relevant sections of empirical research reports, or both. Thus, this paper adds to previous work published in this journal—namely, recent preliminary guidance for conducting reviews of theory [ 11 ]—that has extended the application of systematic review methods to novel review types that are concerned with subject matter other than empirical research findings.

Published examples of methods overviews illustrate the varying objectives they can have. One objective is to establish methodological standards for appraisal purposes. For example, reviews of existing quality appraisal standards have been used to propose universal standards for appraising the quality of primary qualitative research [ 12 ] or evaluating qualitative research reports [ 13 ]. A second objective is to survey the methods-relevant sections of empirical research reports to establish current practices on methods use and reporting practices, which Moher and colleagues [ 14 ] recommend as a means for establishing the needs to be addressed in reporting guidelines (see, for example [ 15 , 16 ]). A third objective for a methods review is to offer clarity and enhance collective understanding regarding a specific methods topic that may be characterized by ambiguity, inconsistency, or a lack of comprehensiveness within the available methods literature. An example of this is a overview whose objective was to review the inconsistent definitions of intention-to-treat analysis (the methodologically preferred approach to analyze randomized controlled trial data) that have been offered in the methods literature and propose a solution for improving conceptual clarity [ 17 ]. Such reviews are warranted because students and researchers who must learn or apply research methods typically lack the time to systematically search, retrieve, review, and compare the available literature to develop a thorough and critical sense of the varied approaches regarding certain controversial or ambiguous methods topics.

While systematic methods overviews , as a review type, include both reviews of the methods literature and reviews of methods-relevant sections from empirical study reports, the guidance provided here is primarily applicable to reviews of the methods literature since it was derived from the experience of conducting such a review [ 18 ], described below. To our knowledge, there are no well-developed proposals on how to rigorously conduct such reviews. Such guidance would have the potential to improve the thoroughness and credibility of critical evaluations of the methods literature, which could increase their utility as a tool for generating understandings that advance research methods, both qualitative and quantitative. Our aim in this paper is thus to initiate discussion about what might constitute a rigorous approach to systematic methods overviews. While we hope to promote rigor in the conduct of systematic methods overviews wherever possible, we do not wish to suggest that all methods overviews need be conducted to the same standard. Rather, we believe that the level of rigor may need to be tailored pragmatically to the specific review objectives, which may not always justify the resource requirements of an intensive review process.

The example systematic methods overview on sampling in qualitative research

The principles and strategies we propose in this paper are derived from experience conducting a systematic methods overview on the topic of sampling in qualitative research [ 18 ]. The main objective of that methods overview was to bring clarity and deeper understanding of the prominent concepts related to sampling in qualitative research (purposeful sampling strategies, saturation, etc.). Specifically, we interpreted the available guidance, commenting on areas lacking clarity, consistency, or comprehensiveness (without proposing any recommendations on how to do sampling). This was achieved by a comparative and critical analysis of publications representing the most influential (i.e., highly cited) guidance across several methodological traditions in qualitative research.

The specific methods and procedures for the overview on sampling [ 18 ] from which our proposals are derived were developed both after soliciting initial input from local experts in qualitative research and an expert health librarian (KAM) and through ongoing careful deliberation throughout the review process. To summarize, in that review, we employed a transparent and rigorous approach to search the methods literature, selected publications for inclusion according to a purposeful and iterative process, abstracted textual data using structured abstraction forms, and analyzed (synthesized) the data using a systematic multi-step approach featuring abstraction of text, summary of information in matrices, and analytic comparisons.

For this article, we reflected on both the problems and challenges encountered at different stages of the review and our means for selecting justifiable procedures to deal with them. Several principles were then derived by considering the generic nature of these problems, while the generalizable aspects of the procedures used to address them formed the basis of optional strategies. Further details of the specific methods and procedures used in the overview on qualitative sampling are provided below to illustrate both the types of objectives and challenges that reviewers will likely need to consider and our approach to implementing each of the principles and strategies.

Organization of the guidance into principles and strategies

For the purposes of this article, principles are general statements outlining what we propose are important aims or considerations within a particular review process, given the unique objectives or challenges to be overcome with this type of review. These statements follow the general format, “considering the objective or challenge of X, we propose Y to be an important aim or consideration.” Strategies are optional and flexible approaches for implementing the previous principle outlined. Thus, generic challenges give rise to principles, which in turn give rise to strategies.

We organize the principles and strategies below into three sections corresponding to processes characteristic of most systematic literature synthesis approaches: literature identification and selection ; data abstraction from the publications selected for inclusion; and analysis , including critical appraisal and synthesis of the abstracted data. Within each section, we also describe the specific methodological decisions and procedures used in the overview on sampling in qualitative research [ 18 ] to illustrate how the principles and strategies for each review process were applied and implemented in a specific case. We expect this guidance and accompanying illustrations will be useful for anyone considering engaging in a methods overview, particularly those who may be familiar with conventional systematic review methods but may not yet appreciate some of the challenges specific to reviewing the methods literature.

Results and discussion

Literature identification and selection.

The identification and selection process includes search and retrieval of publications and the development and application of inclusion and exclusion criteria to select the publications that will be abstracted and analyzed in the final review. Literature identification and selection for overviews of the methods literature is challenging and potentially more resource-intensive than for most reviews of empirical research. This is true for several reasons that we describe below, alongside discussion of the potential solutions. Additionally, we suggest in this section how the selection procedures can be chosen to match the specific analytic approach used in methods overviews.

Delimiting a manageable set of publications

One aspect of methods overviews that can make identification and selection challenging is the fact that the universe of literature containing potentially relevant information regarding most methods-related topics is expansive and often unmanageably so. Reviewers are faced with two large categories of literature: the methods literature , where the possible publication types include journal articles, books, and book chapters; and the methods-relevant sections of empirical study reports , where the possible publication types include journal articles, monographs, books, theses, and conference proceedings. In our systematic overview of sampling in qualitative research, exhaustively searching (including retrieval and first-pass screening) all publication types across both categories of literature for information on a single methods-related topic was too burdensome to be feasible. The following proposed principle follows from the need to delimit a manageable set of literature for the review.

Principle #1:

Considering the broad universe of potentially relevant literature, we propose that an important objective early in the identification and selection stage is to delimit a manageable set of methods-relevant publications in accordance with the objectives of the methods overview.

Strategy #1:

To limit the set of methods-relevant publications that must be managed in the selection process, reviewers have the option to initially review only the methods literature, and exclude the methods-relevant sections of empirical study reports, provided this aligns with the review’s particular objectives.

We propose that reviewers are justified in choosing to select only the methods literature when the objective is to map out the range of recognized concepts relevant to a methods topic, to summarize the most authoritative or influential definitions or meanings for methods-related concepts, or to demonstrate a problematic lack of clarity regarding a widely established methods-related concept and potentially make recommendations for a preferred approach to the methods topic in question. For example, in the case of the methods overview on sampling [ 18 ], the primary aim was to define areas lacking in clarity for multiple widely established sampling-related topics. In the review on intention-to-treat in the context of missing outcome data [ 17 ], the authors identified a lack of clarity based on multiple inconsistent definitions in the literature and went on to recommend separating the issue of how to handle missing outcome data from the issue of whether an intention-to-treat analysis can be claimed.

In contrast to strategy #1, it may be appropriate to select the methods-relevant sections of empirical study reports when the objective is to illustrate how a methods concept is operationalized in research practice or reported by authors. For example, one could review all the publications in 2 years’ worth of issues of five high-impact field-related journals to answer questions about how researchers describe implementing a particular method or approach, or to quantify how consistently they define or report using it. Such reviews are often used to highlight gaps in the reporting practices regarding specific methods, which may be used to justify items to address in reporting guidelines (for example, [ 14 – 16 ]).

It is worth recognizing that other authors have advocated broader positions regarding the scope of literature to be considered in a review, expanding on our perspective. Suri [ 10 ] (who, like us, emphasizes how different sampling strategies are suitable for different literature synthesis objectives) has, for example, described a two-stage literature sampling procedure (pp. 96–97). First, reviewers use an initial approach to conduct a broad overview of the field—for reviews of methods topics, this would entail an initial review of the research methods literature. This is followed by a second more focused stage in which practical examples are purposefully selected—for methods reviews, this would involve sampling the empirical literature to illustrate key themes and variations. While this approach is seductive in its capacity to generate more in depth and interpretive analytic findings, some reviewers may consider it too resource-intensive to include the second step no matter how selective the purposeful sampling. In the overview on sampling where we stopped after the first stage [ 18 ], we discussed our selective focus on the methods literature as a limitation that left opportunities for further analysis of the literature. We explicitly recommended, for example, that theoretical sampling was a topic for which a future review of the methods sections of empirical reports was justified to answer specific questions identified in the primary review.

Ultimately, reviewers must make pragmatic decisions that balance resource considerations, combined with informed predictions about the depth and complexity of literature available on their topic, with the stated objectives of their review. The remaining principles and strategies apply primarily to overviews that include the methods literature, although some aspects may be relevant to reviews that include empirical study reports.

Searching beyond standard bibliographic databases

An important reality affecting identification and selection in overviews of the methods literature is the increased likelihood for relevant publications to be located in sources other than journal articles (which is usually not the case for overviews of empirical research, where journal articles generally represent the primary publication type). In the overview on sampling [ 18 ], out of 41 full-text publications retrieved and reviewed, only 4 were journal articles, while 37 were books or book chapters. Since many books and book chapters did not exist electronically, their full text had to be physically retrieved in hardcopy, while 11 publications were retrievable only through interlibrary loan or purchase request. The tasks associated with such retrieval are substantially more time-consuming than electronic retrieval. Since a substantial proportion of methods-related guidance may be located in publication types that are less comprehensively indexed in standard bibliographic databases, identification and retrieval thus become complicated processes.

Principle #2:

Considering that important sources of methods guidance can be located in non-journal publication types (e.g., books, book chapters) that tend to be poorly indexed in standard bibliographic databases, it is important to consider alternative search methods for identifying relevant publications to be further screened for inclusion.

Strategy #2:

To identify books, book chapters, and other non-journal publication types not thoroughly indexed in standard bibliographic databases, reviewers may choose to consult one or more of the following less standard sources: Google Scholar, publisher web sites, or expert opinion.

In the case of the overview on sampling in qualitative research [ 18 ], Google Scholar had two advantages over other standard bibliographic databases: it indexes and returns records of books and book chapters likely to contain guidance on qualitative research methods topics; and it has been validated as providing higher citation counts than ISI Web of Science (a producer of numerous bibliographic databases accessible through institutional subscription) for several non-biomedical disciplines including the social sciences where qualitative research methods are prominently used [ 19 – 21 ]. While we identified numerous useful publications by consulting experts, the author publication lists generated through Google Scholar searches were uniquely useful to identify more recent editions of methods books identified by experts.

Searching without relevant metadata

Determining what publications to select for inclusion in the overview on sampling [ 18 ] could only rarely be accomplished by reviewing the publication’s metadata. This was because for the many books and other non-journal type publications we identified as possibly relevant, the potential content of interest would be located in only a subsection of the publication. In this common scenario for reviews of the methods literature (as opposed to methods overviews that include empirical study reports), reviewers will often be unable to employ standard title, abstract, and keyword database searching or screening as a means for selecting publications.

Principle #3:

Considering that the presence of information about the topic of interest may not be indicated in the metadata for books and similar publication types, it is important to consider other means of identifying potentially useful publications for further screening.

Strategy #3:

One approach to identifying potentially useful books and similar publication types is to consider what classes of such publications (e.g., all methods manuals for a certain research approach) are likely to contain relevant content, then identify, retrieve, and review the full text of corresponding publications to determine whether they contain information on the topic of interest.

In the example of the overview on sampling in qualitative research [ 18 ], the topic of interest (sampling) was one of numerous topics covered in the general qualitative research methods manuals. Consequently, examples from this class of publications first had to be identified for retrieval according to non-keyword-dependent criteria. Thus, all methods manuals within the three research traditions reviewed (grounded theory, phenomenology, and case study) that might contain discussion of sampling were sought through Google Scholar and expert opinion, their full text obtained, and hand-searched for relevant content to determine eligibility. We used tables of contents and index sections of books to aid this hand searching.

Purposefully selecting literature on conceptual grounds

A final consideration in methods overviews relates to the type of analysis used to generate the review findings. Unlike quantitative systematic reviews where reviewers aim for accurate or unbiased quantitative estimates—something that requires identifying and selecting the literature exhaustively to obtain all relevant data available (i.e., a complete sample)—in methods overviews, reviewers must describe and interpret the relevant literature in qualitative terms to achieve review objectives. In other words, the aim in methods overviews is to seek coverage of the qualitative concepts relevant to the methods topic at hand. For example, in the overview of sampling in qualitative research [ 18 ], achieving review objectives entailed providing conceptual coverage of eight sampling-related topics that emerged as key domains. The following principle recognizes that literature sampling should therefore support generating qualitative conceptual data as the input to analysis.

Principle #4:

Since the analytic findings of a systematic methods overview are generated through qualitative description and interpretation of the literature on a specified topic, selection of the literature should be guided by a purposeful strategy designed to achieve adequate conceptual coverage (i.e., representing an appropriate degree of variation in relevant ideas) of the topic according to objectives of the review.

Strategy #4:

One strategy for choosing the purposeful approach to use in selecting the literature according to the review objectives is to consider whether those objectives imply exploring concepts either at a broad overview level, in which case combining maximum variation selection with a strategy that limits yield (e.g., critical case, politically important, or sampling for influence—described below) may be appropriate; or in depth, in which case purposeful approaches aimed at revealing innovative cases will likely be necessary.

In the methods overview on sampling, the implied scope was broad since we set out to review publications on sampling across three divergent qualitative research traditions—grounded theory, phenomenology, and case study—to facilitate making informative conceptual comparisons. Such an approach would be analogous to maximum variation sampling.

At the same time, the purpose of that review was to critically interrogate the clarity, consistency, and comprehensiveness of literature from these traditions that was “most likely to have widely influenced students’ and researchers’ ideas about sampling” (p. 1774) [ 18 ]. In other words, we explicitly set out to review and critique the most established and influential (and therefore dominant) literature, since this represents a common basis of knowledge among students and researchers seeking understanding or practical guidance on sampling in qualitative research. To achieve this objective, we purposefully sampled publications according to the criterion of influence , which we operationalized as how often an author or publication has been referenced in print or informal discourse. This second sampling approach also limited the literature we needed to consider within our broad scope review to a manageable amount.

To operationalize this strategy of sampling for influence , we sought to identify both the most influential authors within a qualitative research tradition (all of whose citations were subsequently screened) and the most influential publications on the topic of interest by non-influential authors. This involved a flexible approach that combined multiple indicators of influence to avoid the dilemma that any single indicator might provide inadequate coverage. These indicators included bibliometric data (h-index for author influence [ 22 ]; number of cites for publication influence), expert opinion, and cross-references in the literature (i.e., snowball sampling). As a final selection criterion, a publication was included only if it made an original contribution in terms of novel guidance regarding sampling or a related concept; thus, purely secondary sources were excluded. Publish or Perish software (Anne-Wil Harzing; available at http://www.harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish ) was used to generate bibliometric data via the Google Scholar database. Figure  1 illustrates how identification and selection in the methods overview on sampling was a multi-faceted and iterative process. The authors selected as influential, and the publications selected for inclusion or exclusion are listed in Additional file 1 (Matrices 1, 2a, 2b).

Literature identification and selection process used in the methods overview on sampling [ 18 ]

In summary, the strategies of seeking maximum variation and sampling for influence were employed in the sampling overview to meet the specific review objectives described. Reviewers will need to consider the full range of purposeful literature sampling approaches at their disposal in deciding what best matches the specific aims of their own reviews. Suri [ 10 ] has recently retooled Patton’s well-known typology of purposeful sampling strategies (originally intended for primary research) for application to literature synthesis, providing a useful resource in this respect.

Data abstraction

The purpose of data abstraction in rigorous literature reviews is to locate and record all data relevant to the topic of interest from the full text of included publications, making them available for subsequent analysis. Conventionally, a data abstraction form—consisting of numerous distinct conceptually defined fields to which corresponding information from the source publication is recorded—is developed and employed. There are several challenges, however, to the processes of developing the abstraction form and abstracting the data itself when conducting methods overviews, which we address here. Some of these problems and their solutions may be familiar to those who have conducted qualitative literature syntheses, which are similarly conceptual.

Iteratively defining conceptual information to abstract

In the overview on sampling [ 18 ], while we surveyed multiple sources beforehand to develop a list of concepts relevant for abstraction (e.g., purposeful sampling strategies, saturation, sample size), there was no way for us to anticipate some concepts prior to encountering them in the review process. Indeed, in many cases, reviewers are unable to determine the complete set of methods-related concepts that will be the focus of the final review a priori without having systematically reviewed the publications to be included. Thus, defining what information to abstract beforehand may not be feasible.

Principle #5:

Considering the potential impracticality of defining a complete set of relevant methods-related concepts from a body of literature one has not yet systematically read, selecting and defining fields for data abstraction must often be undertaken iteratively. Thus, concepts to be abstracted can be expected to grow and change as data abstraction proceeds.

Strategy #5:

Reviewers can develop an initial form or set of concepts for abstraction purposes according to standard methods (e.g., incorporating expert feedback, pilot testing) and remain attentive to the need to iteratively revise it as concepts are added or modified during the review. Reviewers should document revisions and return to re-abstract data from previously abstracted publications as the new data requirements are determined.

In the sampling overview [ 18 ], we developed and maintained the abstraction form in Microsoft Word. We derived the initial set of abstraction fields from our own knowledge of relevant sampling-related concepts, consultation with local experts, and reviewing a pilot sample of publications. Since the publications in this review included a large proportion of books, the abstraction process often began by flagging the broad sections within a publication containing topic-relevant information for detailed review to identify text to abstract. When reviewing flagged text, the reviewer occasionally encountered an unanticipated concept significant enough to warrant being added as a new field to the abstraction form. For example, a field was added to capture how authors described the timing of sampling decisions, whether before (a priori) or after (ongoing) starting data collection, or whether this was unclear. In these cases, we systematically documented the modification to the form and returned to previously abstracted publications to abstract any information that might be relevant to the new field.

The logic of this strategy is analogous to the logic used in a form of research synthesis called best fit framework synthesis (BFFS) [ 23 – 25 ]. In that method, reviewers initially code evidence using an a priori framework they have selected. When evidence cannot be accommodated by the selected framework, reviewers then develop new themes or concepts from which they construct a new expanded framework. Both the strategy proposed and the BFFS approach to research synthesis are notable for their rigorous and transparent means to adapt a final set of concepts to the content under review.

Accounting for inconsistent terminology

An important complication affecting the abstraction process in methods overviews is that the language used by authors to describe methods-related concepts can easily vary across publications. For example, authors from different qualitative research traditions often use different terms for similar methods-related concepts. Furthermore, as we found in the sampling overview [ 18 ], there may be cases where no identifiable term, phrase, or label for a methods-related concept is used at all, and a description of it is given instead. This can make searching the text for relevant concepts based on keywords unreliable.

Principle #6:

Since accepted terms may not be used consistently to refer to methods concepts, it is necessary to rely on the definitions for concepts, rather than keywords, to identify relevant information in the publication to abstract.

Strategy #6:

An effective means to systematically identify relevant information is to develop and iteratively adjust written definitions for key concepts (corresponding to abstraction fields) that are consistent with and as inclusive of as much of the literature reviewed as possible. Reviewers then seek information that matches these definitions (rather than keywords) when scanning a publication for relevant data to abstract.

In the abstraction process for the sampling overview [ 18 ], we noted the several concepts of interest to the review for which abstraction by keyword was particularly problematic due to inconsistent terminology across publications: sampling , purposeful sampling , sampling strategy , and saturation (for examples, see Additional file 1 , Matrices 3a, 3b, 4). We iteratively developed definitions for these concepts by abstracting text from publications that either provided an explicit definition or from which an implicit definition could be derived, which was recorded in fields dedicated to the concept’s definition. Using a method of constant comparison, we used text from definition fields to inform and modify a centrally maintained definition of the corresponding concept to optimize its fit and inclusiveness with the literature reviewed. Table  1 shows, as an example, the final definition constructed in this way for one of the central concepts of the review, qualitative sampling .

We applied iteratively developed definitions when making decisions about what specific text to abstract for an existing field, which allowed us to abstract concept-relevant data even if no recognized keyword was used. For example, this was the case for the sampling-related concept, saturation , where the relevant text available for abstraction in one publication [ 26 ]—“to continue to collect data until nothing new was being observed or recorded, no matter how long that takes”—was not accompanied by any term or label whatsoever.

This comparative analytic strategy (and our approach to analysis more broadly as described in strategy #7, below) is analogous to the process of reciprocal translation —a technique first introduced for meta-ethnography by Noblit and Hare [ 27 ] that has since been recognized as a common element in a variety of qualitative metasynthesis approaches [ 28 ]. Reciprocal translation, taken broadly, involves making sense of a study’s findings in terms of the findings of the other studies included in the review. In practice, it has been operationalized in different ways. Melendez-Torres and colleagues developed a typology from their review of the metasynthesis literature, describing four overlapping categories of specific operations undertaken in reciprocal translation: visual representation, key paper integration, data reduction and thematic extraction, and line-by-line coding [ 28 ]. The approaches suggested in both strategies #6 and #7, with their emphasis on constant comparison, appear to fall within the line-by-line coding category.

Generating credible and verifiable analytic interpretations

The analysis in a systematic methods overview must support its more general objective, which we suggested above is often to offer clarity and enhance collective understanding regarding a chosen methods topic. In our experience, this involves describing and interpreting the relevant literature in qualitative terms. Furthermore, any interpretative analysis required may entail reaching different levels of abstraction, depending on the more specific objectives of the review. For example, in the overview on sampling [ 18 ], we aimed to produce a comparative analysis of how multiple sampling-related topics were treated differently within and among different qualitative research traditions. To promote credibility of the review, however, not only should one seek a qualitative analytic approach that facilitates reaching varying levels of abstraction but that approach must also ensure that abstract interpretations are supported and justified by the source data and not solely the product of the analyst’s speculative thinking.

Principle #7:

Considering the qualitative nature of the analysis required in systematic methods overviews, it is important to select an analytic method whose interpretations can be verified as being consistent with the literature selected, regardless of the level of abstraction reached.

Strategy #7:

We suggest employing the constant comparative method of analysis [ 29 ] because it supports developing and verifying analytic links to the source data throughout progressively interpretive or abstract levels. In applying this approach, we advise a rigorous approach, documenting how supportive quotes or references to the original texts are carried forward in the successive steps of analysis to allow for easy verification.

The analytic approach used in the methods overview on sampling [ 18 ] comprised four explicit steps, progressing in level of abstraction—data abstraction, matrices, narrative summaries, and final analytic conclusions (Fig.  2 ). While we have positioned data abstraction as the second stage of the generic review process (prior to Analysis), above, we also considered it as an initial step of analysis in the sampling overview for several reasons. First, it involved a process of constant comparisons and iterative decision-making about the fields to add or define during development and modification of the abstraction form, through which we established the range of concepts to be addressed in the review. At the same time, abstraction involved continuous analytic decisions about what textual quotes (ranging in size from short phrases to numerous paragraphs) to record in the fields thus created. This constant comparative process was analogous to open coding in which textual data from publications was compared to conceptual fields (equivalent to codes) or to other instances of data previously abstracted when constructing definitions to optimize their fit with the overall literature as described in strategy #6. Finally, in the data abstraction step, we also recorded our first interpretive thoughts in dedicated fields, providing initial material for the more abstract analytic steps.

Summary of progressive steps of analysis used in the methods overview on sampling [ 18 ]

In the second step of the analysis, we constructed topic-specific matrices , or tables, by copying relevant quotes from abstraction forms into the appropriate cells of matrices (for the complete set of analytic matrices developed in the sampling review, see Additional file 1 (matrices 3 to 10)). Each matrix ranged from one to five pages; row headings, nested three-deep, identified the methodological tradition, author, and publication, respectively; and column headings identified the concepts, which corresponded to abstraction fields. Matrices thus allowed us to make further comparisons across methodological traditions, and between authors within a tradition. In the third step of analysis, we recorded our comparative observations as narrative summaries , in which we used illustrative quotes more sparingly. In the final step, we developed analytic conclusions based on the narrative summaries about the sampling-related concepts within each methodological tradition for which clarity, consistency, or comprehensiveness of the available guidance appeared to be lacking. Higher levels of analysis thus built logically from the lower levels, enabling us to easily verify analytic conclusions by tracing the support for claims by comparing the original text of publications reviewed.

Integrative versus interpretive methods overviews

The analytic product of systematic methods overviews is comparable to qualitative evidence syntheses, since both involve describing and interpreting the relevant literature in qualitative terms. Most qualitative synthesis approaches strive to produce new conceptual understandings that vary in level of interpretation. Dixon-Woods and colleagues [ 30 ] elaborate on a useful distinction, originating from Noblit and Hare [ 27 ], between integrative and interpretive reviews. Integrative reviews focus on summarizing available primary data and involve using largely secure and well defined concepts to do so; definitions are used from an early stage to specify categories for abstraction (or coding) of data, which in turn supports their aggregation; they do not seek as their primary focus to develop or specify new concepts, although they may achieve some theoretical or interpretive functions. For interpretive reviews, meanwhile, the main focus is to develop new concepts and theories that integrate them, with the implication that the concepts developed become fully defined towards the end of the analysis. These two forms are not completely distinct, and “every integrative synthesis will include elements of interpretation, and every interpretive synthesis will include elements of aggregation of data” [ 30 ].

The example methods overview on sampling [ 18 ] could be classified as predominantly integrative because its primary goal was to aggregate influential authors’ ideas on sampling-related concepts; there were also, however, elements of interpretive synthesis since it aimed to develop new ideas about where clarity in guidance on certain sampling-related topics is lacking, and definitions for some concepts were flexible and not fixed until late in the review. We suggest that most systematic methods overviews will be classifiable as predominantly integrative (aggregative). Nevertheless, more highly interpretive methods overviews are also quite possible—for example, when the review objective is to provide a highly critical analysis for the purpose of generating new methodological guidance. In such cases, reviewers may need to sample more deeply (see strategy #4), specifically by selecting empirical research reports (i.e., to go beyond dominant or influential ideas in the methods literature) that are likely to feature innovations or instructive lessons in employing a given method.

In this paper, we have outlined tentative guidance in the form of seven principles and strategies on how to conduct systematic methods overviews, a review type in which methods-relevant literature is systematically analyzed with the aim of offering clarity and enhancing collective understanding regarding a specific methods topic. Our proposals include strategies for delimiting the set of publications to consider, searching beyond standard bibliographic databases, searching without the availability of relevant metadata, selecting publications on purposeful conceptual grounds, defining concepts and other information to abstract iteratively, accounting for inconsistent terminology, and generating credible and verifiable analytic interpretations. We hope the suggestions proposed will be useful to others undertaking reviews on methods topics in future.

As far as we are aware, this is the first published source of concrete guidance for conducting this type of review. It is important to note that our primary objective was to initiate methodological discussion by stimulating reflection on what rigorous methods for this type of review should look like, leaving the development of more complete guidance to future work. While derived from the experience of reviewing a single qualitative methods topic, we believe the principles and strategies provided are generalizable to overviews of both qualitative and quantitative methods topics alike. However, it is expected that additional challenges and insights for conducting such reviews have yet to be defined. Thus, we propose that next steps for developing more definitive guidance should involve an attempt to collect and integrate other reviewers’ perspectives and experiences in conducting systematic methods overviews on a broad range of qualitative and quantitative methods topics. Formalized guidance and standards would improve the quality of future methods overviews, something we believe has important implications for advancing qualitative and quantitative methodology. When undertaken to a high standard, rigorous critical evaluations of the available methods guidance have significant potential to make implicit controversies explicit, and improve the clarity and precision of our understandings of problematic qualitative or quantitative methods issues.

A review process central to most types of rigorous reviews of empirical studies, which we did not explicitly address in a separate review step above, is quality appraisal . The reason we have not treated this as a separate step stems from the different objectives of the primary publications included in overviews of the methods literature (i.e., providing methodological guidance) compared to the primary publications included in the other established review types (i.e., reporting findings from single empirical studies). This is not to say that appraising quality of the methods literature is not an important concern for systematic methods overviews. Rather, appraisal is much more integral to (and difficult to separate from) the analysis step, in which we advocate appraising clarity, consistency, and comprehensiveness—the quality appraisal criteria that we suggest are appropriate for the methods literature. As a second important difference regarding appraisal, we currently advocate appraising the aforementioned aspects at the level of the literature in aggregate rather than at the level of individual publications. One reason for this is that methods guidance from individual publications generally builds on previous literature, and thus we feel that ahistorical judgments about comprehensiveness of single publications lack relevance and utility. Additionally, while different methods authors may express themselves less clearly than others, their guidance can nonetheless be highly influential and useful, and should therefore not be downgraded or ignored based on considerations of clarity—which raises questions about the alternative uses that quality appraisals of individual publications might have. Finally, legitimate variability in the perspectives that methods authors wish to emphasize, and the levels of generality at which they write about methods, makes critiquing individual publications based on the criterion of clarity a complex and potentially problematic endeavor that is beyond the scope of this paper to address. By appraising the current state of the literature at a holistic level, reviewers stand to identify important gaps in understanding that represent valuable opportunities for further methodological development.

To summarize, the principles and strategies provided here may be useful to those seeking to undertake their own systematic methods overview. Additional work is needed, however, to establish guidance that is comprehensive by comparing the experiences from conducting a variety of methods overviews on a range of methods topics. Efforts that further advance standards for systematic methods overviews have the potential to promote high-quality critical evaluations that produce conceptually clear and unified understandings of problematic methods topics, thereby accelerating the advance of research methodology.

Hutton JL, Ashcroft R. What does “systematic” mean for reviews of methods? In: Black N, Brazier J, Fitzpatrick R, Reeves B, editors. Health services research methods: a guide to best practice. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 1998. p. 249–54.

Google Scholar  

Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. In. Edited by Higgins JPT, Green S, Version 5.1.0 edn: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care . York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; 2009.

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700–0.

Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9(1):59.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kastner M, Tricco AC, Soobiah C, Lillie E, Perrier L, Horsley T, Welch V, Cogo E, Antony J, Straus SE. What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12(1):1–1.

Article   Google Scholar  

Booth A, Noyes J, Flemming K, Gerhardus A. Guidance on choosing qualitative evidence synthesis methods for use in health technology assessments of complex interventions. In: Integrate-HTA. 2016.

Booth A, Sutton A, Papaioannou D. Systematic approaches to successful literature review. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2016.

Hannes K, Lockwood C. Synthesizing qualitative research: choosing the right approach. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.

Suri H. Towards methodologically inclusive research syntheses: expanding possibilities. New York: Routledge; 2014.

Campbell M, Egan M, Lorenc T, Bond L, Popham F, Fenton C, Benzeval M. Considering methodological options for reviews of theory: illustrated by a review of theories linking income and health. Syst Rev. 2014;3(1):1–11.

Cohen DJ, Crabtree BF. Evaluative criteria for qualitative research in health care: controversies and recommendations. Ann Fam Med. 2008;6(4):331–9.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reportingqualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. 2010;7(2):e1000217.

Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007;4(3):e78.

Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet. 2005;365(9465):1159–62.

Alshurafa M, Briel M, Akl EA, Haines T, Moayyedi P, Gentles SJ, Rios L, Tran C, Bhatnagar N, Lamontagne F, et al. Inconsistent definitions for intention-to-treat in relation to missing outcome data: systematic review of the methods literature. PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e49163.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gentles SJ, Charles C, Ploeg J, McKibbon KA. Sampling in qualitative research: insights from an overview of the methods literature. Qual Rep. 2015;20(11):1772–89.

Harzing A-W, Alakangas S. Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics. 2016;106(2):787–804.

Harzing A-WK, van der Wal R. Google Scholar as a new source for citation analysis. Ethics Sci Environ Polit. 2008;8(1):61–73.

Kousha K, Thelwall M. Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations: a multi‐discipline exploratory analysis. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2007;58(7):1055–65.

Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(46):16569–72.

Booth A, Carroll C. How to build up the actionable knowledge base: the role of ‘best fit’ framework synthesis for studies of improvement in healthcare. BMJ Quality Safety. 2015;24(11):700–8.

Carroll C, Booth A, Leaviss J, Rick J. “Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):37.

Carroll C, Booth A, Cooper K. A worked example of “best fit” framework synthesis: a systematic review of views concerning the taking of some potential chemopreventive agents. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):29.

Cohen MZ, Kahn DL, Steeves DL. Hermeneutic phenomenological research: a practical guide for nurse researchers. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2000.

Noblit GW, Hare RD. Meta-ethnography: synthesizing qualitative studies. Newbury Park: Sage; 1988.

Book   Google Scholar  

Melendez-Torres GJ, Grant S, Bonell C. A systematic review and critical appraisal of qualitative metasynthetic practice in public health to develop a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation. Res Synthesis Methods. 2015;6(4):357–71.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Glaser BG, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.

Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Young B, Jones D, Sutton A. Integrative approaches to qualitative and quantitative evidence. In: UK National Health Service. 2004. p. 1–44.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

There was no funding for this work.

Availability of data and materials

The systematic methods overview used as a worked example in this article (Gentles SJ, Charles C, Ploeg J, McKibbon KA: Sampling in qualitative research: insights from an overview of the methods literature. The Qual Rep 2015, 20(11):1772-1789) is available from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss11/5 .

Authors’ contributions

SJG wrote the first draft of this article, with CC contributing to drafting. All authors contributed to revising the manuscript. All authors except CC (deceased) approved the final draft. SJG, CC, KAB, and JP were involved in developing methods for the systematic methods overview on sampling.

Authors’ information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Consent for publication

Ethics approval and consent to participate, author information, authors and affiliations.

Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Stephen J. Gentles, Cathy Charles & K. Ann McKibbon

Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada

David B. Nicholas

School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Jenny Ploeg

CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, McMaster University, 1400 Main Street West, IAHS 408, Hamilton, ON, L8S 1C7, Canada

Stephen J. Gentles

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen J. Gentles .

Additional information

Cathy Charles is deceased

Additional file

Additional file 1:.

Submitted: Analysis_matrices. (DOC 330 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gentles, S.J., Charles, C., Nicholas, D.B. et al. Reviewing the research methods literature: principles and strategies illustrated by a systematic overview of sampling in qualitative research. Syst Rev 5 , 172 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0343-0

Download citation

Received : 06 June 2016

Accepted : 14 September 2016

Published : 11 October 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0343-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Systematic review
• Literature selection
• Research methods
• Research methodology
• Overview of methods
• Systematic methods overview
• Review methods

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Final Report for the Institute of Museum and Library Services

Literacy development in the early childhood and elementary school years is critical for learning and the acquisition of other skills essential for educational achievement. Although schools typically assume the primary responsibility in developing children’s literacy and reading skills, a holistic approach to overall literacy development requires the involvement of other important actors, including parents, caregivers, community members, and libraries. Public libraries play a key role in the literacy landscape, especially by providing access to books and a variety of free literacy programs for families. The public library as a space and place that motivates kids to enjoy reading can lead to a lifelong love of learning. In summer 2023, IMLS commissioned a review of research literature that examines the effects of motivation to read and within reading programs in communities and, particularly, public libraries.

Key findings from this literature review identify research studies that focused on the effectiveness of reading strategies that emphasized motivations when promoting reading. This study summarizes several evidence-based practices tied to increasing motivation used during programs, instructional practices, and family engagement activities which are focused on child literacy and community participation.

Guide to Thematic Analysis

• Abductive Thematic Analysis
• Collaborative Thematic Analysis
• Deductive Thematic Analysis
• How to Do Thematic Analysis
• Inductive Thematic Analysis
• Reflexive Thematic Analysis
• Advantages of Thematic Analysis
• Introduction

What is a case study?

How to do a thematic analysis for a case study research project.

• Thematic Coding
• Disadvantages of Thematic Analysis
• Thematic Analysis in Educational Research
• Thematic Analysis Examples
• Thematic Analysis for Focus Groups
• Thematic Analysis vs. Grounded Theory
• What is Thematic Analysis?
• Increasing Rigor in Thematic Analysis
• Thematic Analysis for Interviews
• Thematic Analysis Literature Review
• Thematic Analysis in Mixed Methods Approach
• Thematic Analysis in Observations
• Peer Review in Thematic Analysis
• How to Present Thematic Analysis Results
• Thematic Analysis in Psychology
• Thematic Analysis of Secondary Data
• Thematic Analysis in Social Work
• Thematic Analysis Software
• Thematic Analysis in Surveys
• Thematic Analysis in UX Research
• Thematic vs. Content Analysis
• Thematic Analysis vs. Discourse Analysis
• Thematic Analysis vs. Framework Analysis
• Thematic Analysis vs. Narrative Analysis
• Thematic Analysis vs. Phenomenology

Thematic analysis and case study research are widely used qualitative methods , each offering distinct ways to gather and interpret qualitative data . Thematic analysis allows researchers to identify patterns and themes within data sets, providing insight into shared experiences or perspectives. On the other hand, case study research focuses on in-depth analysis of a particular instance or case, offering detailed understanding of complex issues in real-life contexts. Combining these two methods can yield comprehensive insights, enabling researchers to analyze specific cases with a nuanced understanding of broader themes. This article provides a guide on conducting thematic analysis within the framework of case study research, outlining key steps and considerations to ensure rigorous and insightful outcomes to address your research objective.

A case study is a research strategy that involves an in-depth investigation of a single case or a number of cases within their real-life context. Unlike quantitative research , which seeks to quantify data and generalize results from a sample to a population, a case study approach allows for a more detailed and nuanced exploration of complex phenomena. This method is particularly useful in fields such as psychology, sociology, education, and business, where understanding the specifics of a single situation can require qualitative analysis to provide insights into broader patterns and issues.

Case studies can be based on various sources of evidence, including documents, archival records, interviews , direct observation , participant-observation, and physical artifacts. By employing multiple sources of data, case study research enhances the robustness of the findings, offering a more comprehensive view of the subject under study.

There are several types of case studies, each serving different purposes in research. These include exploratory, explanatory, and descriptive case studies. Exploratory case studies are often used as a prelude to further, more detailed research, allowing expert and novice researchers to gather initial insights and formulate hypotheses or propositions. Explanatory case studies are utilized to explain the mechanisms behind a particular phenomenon, often in response to theory-driven questions. Descriptive case studies, on the other hand, aim to provide a detailed account of the case within its context, without necessarily aiming to answer 'why' or 'how' questions.

One of the key strengths of case study research is its ability to provide insight into the context in which the case operates, which is often lost in larger-scale quantitative studies. This context can include social, economic, cultural, and other factors that significantly influence the case. Understanding these contextual factors is crucial for interpreting the findings accurately and can help to identify how the results of a case study might (or might not) be applicable in similar situations.

However, case study research is not without its challenges. The in-depth nature of the investigation often requires a significant amount of time and resources. Additionally, the findings from a case study are sometimes viewed as having limited generalizability due to the focus on a specific case or a small number of cases. To address this concern, researchers can employ a technique known as 'theoretical generalization,' where findings are related back to existing theories, contributing to a broader understanding of the phenomenon.

Whatever your qualitative research method, turn to ATLAS.ti

Narrative analysis, focus group discussions, do it all with our powerful tools. Start with a free trial today.

Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data. It provides a flexible and useful tool for qualitative research , especially within the context of case study research . This section outlines the steps for conducting a thematic analysis in a case study research project after data collection , ensuring a systematic and rigorous approach to data analysis . The process is divided into three key subsections: preparing your data, identifying themes, and reviewing and defining themes.

Preparing qualitative data

The first step in thematic analysis is to become familiar with your data. Usually this is textual data that can help you name relevant themes later on. This involves a detailed and immersive reading of the data collected from your case study. Data can include interview transcripts , observation notes , documents , and other relevant materials. During this phase, it's crucial to start making initial notes and marking ideas for coding. Remember to refer to important theories from your literature review to inform your subsequent analyses. Organizing your data systematically is also essential; this could mean arranging data into different types based on the source or nature of the information. This preparatory work lays the foundation for a more focused and efficient analysis process.

Identifying themes

After familiarizing yourself with the data, you can code the data by selecting interesting segments of data and attaching a code (or label) to capture the essence of each data segment and how it relates to your research question. After this initial coding, the next step is to begin theme development. This involves collating all the codes and the relevant data to identify themes that emerge across the dataset. A theme captures something important about the data in relation to the research question and represents some level of patterned response or underlying meaning within the data set. During this phase, it's important to be flexible - themes may evolve or merge as you refine your analysis and gain a deeper understanding of the data.

Reviewing and defining themes

Once potential themes have been identified from your qualitative study, the next step is to review and refine them. This involves a two-level review process: first, reviewing the themes identified in relation to the coded extracts, and then reviewing these themes in relation to the entire dataset. This step ensures that each theme is coherent, consistent, and distinct. It also involves determining the "story" that each theme tells about the data, which is critical for the next steps of analysis and for writing up the findings. Finally, it is necessary to define and name the themes, which involves a careful consideration of what each theme captures about the data and how it relates to the research questions and objectives.

Turn your data into critical insights with ATLAS.ti

Qualitative researchers turn to ATLAS.ti for analyzing qualitative data. See why with a free trial.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 27 April 2024

Advancing the local climate zones framework: a critical review of methodological progress, persisting challenges, and future research prospects

• Jie Han   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0003-3165-631X 1 ,
• Jingyi Cai 1 ,
• Leixin Ouyang 2 &
• Zhengxuan Liu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2761-5078 3  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  538 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

392 Accesses

Metrics details

• Environmental studies
• Science, technology and society

The local climate zones (LCZs) classification system has emerged as a more refined method for assessing the urban heat island (UHI) effect. However, few researchers have conducted systematic critical reviews and summaries of the research on LCZs, particularly regarding significant advancements of this field in recent years. This paper aims to bridge this gap in scientific research by systematically reviewing the evolution, current status, and future trends of LCZs framework research. Additionally, it critically assesses the impact of the LCZs classification system on climate-responsive urban planning and design. The findings of this study highlight several key points. First, the challenge of large-scale, efficient, and accurate LCZs mapping persists as a significant issue in LCZs research. Despite this challenge, the universality, simplicity, and objectivity of the LCZs framework make it a promising tool for a wide range of applications in the future, especially in the realm of climate-responsive urban planning and design. In conclusion, this study makes a substantial contribution to the advancement of LCZs research and advocates for the broader adoption of this framework to foster sustainable urban development. Furthermore, it offers valuable insights for researchers and practitioners engaged in this field.

Similar content being viewed by others

Global multi-model projections of local urban climates

Global mapping of urban nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation

Urban Nature Indexes tool offers comprehensive and flexible approach to monitoring urban ecological performance

Introduction.

Urbanization is an irreversible process that will continue to accelerate over the next three decades, resulting in a projected global urban population increase of up to 668 million (UN-Habitat 2022 ). While urbanization brings economic development, cultural exchange, and technological progress, it also concentrates people in cities, leading to higher greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants. These emissions contribute to air quality degradation, global warming, and climate change. Urban heat island (UHI), characterized by higher temperatures in urban areas compared to their surrounding rural areas, is a consequence of urbanization, driven by unique urban surfaces and anthropogenic heat release. UHI carries numerous adverse effects, including increased energy consumption, air pollution, degradation of living conditions, and elevated heat-related mortality rates. All of these challenges significantly impede sustainable development, underscoring the critical importance of identifying, mitigating, and adapting to UHI (Huang and Lu 2018 ).

The term “urban heat island” was first introduced by Balchin and Pye ( 1947 ), and it has since become a prominent research field within urban climate studies (Peng et al. 2022 , Zhang et al. 2022 , Mo et al. 2024 ). The central issue in UHI research revolves around quantifying urban heat island intensity (UHII) (Huang and Lu 2018 ). The conventional approach to UHI evaluation involves computing UHII by comparing the average temperature difference between urban and rural areas. However, this method encounters limitations due to the diverse nature of urban morphology, land cover, and human activities, leading to varying UHII results within urban areas. Consequently, UHI analysis and mitigation strategies based on these results lack precision. Another challenge with the urban-rural dichotomy lies in selecting suburban measurement points that are minimally affected by urbanization. With urbanization, the once-clear social, political, and economic boundaries between urban and rural areas have blurred. It is more accurate to describe the relationship between urban and rural areas as a continuous and dynamic system rather than a rigid dichotomy.

To address the shortcomings of the traditional “urban-rural dichotomy” in UHI research, the local climate zones (LCZs) classification system, introduced by Stewart and Oke ( 2012 ), offers a fresh research framework. This system has expanded its applications beyond UHI research and is now being employed in other domains related to sustainable urban development, including urban planning (Pradhesta et al. 2019 , Kopp et al. 2021 ), building energy consumption (Yang et al. 2020a , 2022 , Benjamin et al. 2021 ), and urban thermal comfort (Lau et al. 2019 , Wu et al. 2022 ).

Table 1 lists the existing review articles on LCZs research. Many researchers in the domain of LCZs mapping have directed their attention to the current advancements in this area. For instance, Huang et al. ( 2023 ) offered a comprehensive review of LCZs mapping, providing detailed analyses of remote sensing (RS)-based and geographic information system (GIS)-based methods. They discussed RS-based methods in terms of feature sets, classification units, training areas, classification algorithms, and accuracy assessment, while GIS-based methods were elaborated based on LCZ parameters, basic spatial units (BSUs), classification algorithms, and accuracy assessment. Quan and Bansal ( 2021 ) summarized the general LCZs mapping processes in the reviewed studies, encompassing data collection, defining BSUs, calculating urban canopy parameters (UCPs), LCZs classification, post-processing, and performance evaluation. Ma et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a timely investigation into RS-based LCZs mapping applications. They analyzed and evaluated several aspects influencing LCZs mapping performance, including mapping units/scales, transferability, sample datasets, low accuracy, and classification schemes. Meanwhile, researchers have dedicated their focus to the field pertaining to the LCZs framework. For example, Lehnert et al. ( 2021 ) provided a comprehensive analysis of the application of the LCZs framework in European urban areas, demonstrating an increasing and widely recognized use of LCZs in climate research across European cities. Xue et al. ( 2020 ) explored the applications of LCZs schemes in various research fields such as meteorology, atmospheric science, environmental science, remote sensing, architectural technology, civil engineering, and ecology by conducting a bibliometric analysis of articles citing LCZs using CiteSpace. Additionally, most review studies utilize bibliometric analysis to review LCZs research. However, bibliometric analysis has the limitation of time lag due to the literature on which it is based, which can not sufficiently reflect the latest research progress.

The mentioned studies indicate the significant attention LCZs-related research has garnered within the academic community. Nonetheless, several noticeable gaps exist: 1) Few researchers have systematically conducted critical reviews and comprehensive summaries of LCZs research, especially concerning its recent notable advancements. 2) A thorough investigation into its development, research methodologies, and broader applications, particularly in sustainable urban development contexts, is warranted. This paper’s innovations and contributions primarily involve:

1) Given recent advancements, this study comprehensively examines and categorizes research methods and application areas within the LCZs framework. This analysis provides a thorough understanding of theoretical foundations and practical applications, contributing to a more holistic comprehension of LCZs studies.

2) The paper critically evaluates the effectiveness of the LCZs classification system in supporting climate-responsive urban planning and design. This assessment is crucial in understanding the practical utility of the LCZs framework for sustainable urban development and its potential to mitigate UHI challenges.

The primary sections of this paper are structured as follows: The literature survey and corresponding quantitative analysis are presented in Literature Survey. Advancements in local climate zones framework introduces the LCZs framework and delves into the measurement of UCPs. Recent advancements in manual sampling and mapping methods of LCZs reviews the progress of LCZs research methods applied in UHI research. Application of LCZs framework in various scenarios explores the various application areas of LCZs, with a particular focus on its utility in UHI research and climate-sensitive urban design. Limitations, challenges, and future prospects engages in a discussion regarding research limitations and potential future applications of the LCZs framework. Conclusions presents the key findings and conclusions drawn from the study. This structured approach allows for a systematic and in-depth exploration of the LCZs classification system’s development and its multifaceted applications in the context of research related to sustainable urban development.

Literature survey

This study conducted a comprehensive screening of all peer-reviewed journal and conference papers that cited the original LCZs framework articles based on the Web of Science dataset. As of February 2023, a total of 1534 papers were identified. Based on this, we performed literature statistics and bibliometric analysis to quantitatively assess the current state of development of LCZs research.

Literature statistics

The literature statistics were conducted from three aspects: annual output, country distribution, and research fields. Figures 1 and 2 provide visual representations of the annual output and the country distribution of LCZs research for the period spanning from 2013 to 2022. Since the introduction of the LCZs framework in 2012, there has been a notable surge in publications related to LCZs research. Specifically, the number of publications has seen a substantial increase, starting at 17 in 2013 and reaching 300 in 2022. This upward trend underscores the escalating interest and engagement in LCZs research within the academic community and beyond. Furthermore, the distribution of countries reveals five nations that have made substantial contributions to LCZs research. China stands out with the highest number of papers, accounting for 668 publications, which amounts to approximately 43.55% of the total papers. Following China, the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Australia have also made significant contributions to LCZs research, with 333, 225, 176, and 104 publications, respectively. These statistics highlight the global reach and significance of LCZs research, with diverse countries actively participating in advancing this research field.

Annual output of LCZs research.

Country distribution of LCZs research.

Table 2 provides an overview of the distribution of research fields related to LCZs. LCZs research is characterized by its interdisciplinary nature, encompassing a wide spectrum of academic disciplines. The research content of LCZs studies spans several fields: (1) Meteorology and atmospheric sciences: The LCZs framework is employed to investigate urban meteorology, evaluate the impact of urbanization on weather patterns, and develop models for urban climate simulations; (2) Environmental sciences and ecology: The LCZs classification system helps identify and quantify the effect of urbanization on ecosystems, biodiversity, and the overall environment; (3) Physical sciences: The LCZs classification takes into account physical parameters such as surface materials, building density, and thermal admittance. This classification helps physical scientists study the thermal characteristics of urban surfaces, develop models for energy balance calculations, and explore the impact of different materials on the UHI effect; (4) Geography: Geographers use LCZs framework to investigate urban morphology, land use dynamics, urban-rural interactions, and the relationship between urban form and climate; (5) Energy and fuels: The LCZs classification system helps identify areas with high energy demand or heat stress, guiding the development of energy-efficient buildings, urban cooling techniques, and renewable energy integration; (6) RS: RS is a prominent and integral research direction within LCZs. It involves the use of satellite and aerial imagery to map and monitor large-scale urban climates, often supported by GIS technologies. The multidisciplinary nature of LCZs research enables cross-disciplinary collaboration and knowledge integration, making it a versatile framework for understanding and addressing urban climate challenges.

Bibliometric analysis

The study employs the concept of “co-occurrence clustering” and utilizes the CiteSpace visualization software to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the screening results. In this analysis, the fundamental unit of information extraction and structural construction is the “keywords”. The research utilizes a “keyword co-occurrence” network to depict the knowledge structure, research evolution, and current research focal points within the LCZs application field. In this network, each node corresponds to a keyword found in the literature, and the links represent the connections between these keywords. The objective is to visually and analytically explore the nodes, links, and overall network structure, shedding light on the present state of development in the LCZs application field. This approach allows for a systematic and data-driven examination of the relationships between keywords and their significance within the context of LCZs research. It facilitates the identification of trends, patterns, and emerging areas of interest within this field, providing valuable insights for researchers and practitioners alike.

In the analyzed literature employing the LCZs framework, several recurring nodes stand out, shedding light on the primary objectives and emphases of LCZs research. The top five frequently occurring nodes include “urban heat island,” “temperature,” “climate,” “impact,” and “city,” as illustrated in Fig. 3 . These nodes collectively indicate that LCZs research primarily seeks to understand the factors influencing urban climates (“climate” and “city”), particularly the impact on temperature parameters (“temperature”). There is a notable focus on examining how the factors affect UHI (“urban heat island”), which aligns with the LCZs framework’s original purpose. The high frequency of “urban heat island” (697 times, with 144 mentions in 2021) underscores its central role in LCZs research. This centrality stems from the LCZs framework’s inception, which aimed to address the limitations of the “urban-rural dichotomy” in UHI studies, enabling a more nuanced understanding of UHI impacts and the development of effective mitigation strategies.

Keyword co-present of the analyzed LCZs literature.

Advancements in local climate zones framework

Local climate zone classification system.

LCZs are defined as areas with uniform surface cover, structure, material, and human activity, with a minimum radius of 200–500 m, which exhibit local-scale, climatic nature, and zonal representation as depicted in Fig. 4 . The LCZs classification system is based on 10 UCPs with recommended ranges, allowing for classification into 17 standard LCZ patterns, comprising 10 built types and 7 land cover types. The various LCZ types represent the diverse compositions of buildings, roads, plants, soils, rocks, and water. The names of standard built types primarily reflect three building structure characteristics (Density: compact/open; Height: high/mid/low; Material: heavy/lightweight) and building type (general/industrial). Conversely, the counterparts of standard land cover types mainly reflected the vegetation and land cover characteristics.

Schematic diagram of standard LCZs.

The process of LCZs classification usually involves four steps: data acquisition, UCPs calculation, LCZs classification, and accuracy evaluation. The first step is to collect the required information for the study area (e.g., field measurements and satellite images). The second step involves calculating UCPs using the data gathered in the previous step. A detailed description of the calculation methods for UCPs is provided in Measurement of urban canopy parameters. For LCZs classification, the results from UCPs calculation can assist in identifying the best match between field sites and LCZ classes. Additionally, LCZs subclasses can be customized when UCPs deviate from the recommended ranges of the standard set of classes. For instance, a combination of LCZ 4 (Open high-rise) and 3 (Compact low-rise) can provide LCZ 3 4 (Compact low-rise with open high-rise).

Measurement of urban canopy parameters

For achieving precise LCZs classification, obtaining accurate values for UCPs is of paramount importance. These UCPs are primarily related to surface structure parameters, including sky view factor (SVF) (Steyn 1980 , Matzarakis et al. 2007 , Liang et al. 2017 ), aspect ratio (AR) (Masson 2000 ), and height of roughness elements (HRE) (Yan and Huang 2022 , Wu et al. 2023 ). They also encompass surface cover parameters such as building surface fraction (BSF) (Yu et al. 2010 , Guo et al. 2022 , Jifroudi et al. 2022 , Wei et al. 2023 ), impervious surface fractions (ISF), and pervious surface fractions (PSF) (Deng and Wu 2013 , Sytsma et al. 2020 ). Surface fabric parameters (surface admittance and surface albedo (Bartmiński and Siłuch 2022 , Tahooni et al. 2023 )) and human activity parameters (anthropogenic heat flux (Yu et al. 2021 , Wang et al. 2022b , Liu and Li 2023 )) are equally included.

In the absence of specific heat-related indicators, most current studies rely on the geometric and ground cover values to define LCZs. Table 3 highlights the various methods employed in previous studies to measure parameters related to ground cover and geometry. Measurement methods for SVF are typically categorized as fisheye photographs, satellite images, street view images, and numerical simulations. Parameters such as AR, BSF, ISF, PSF, HRE, and TRC are primarily grouped into three categories: field measurement, satellite image calculation, and building data acquisition.

In summary, methods for measuring UCPs mainly consist of manual measurement and satellite image calculation. Manual measurement involves collecting data from a few sampling points in a region and then averaging them to determine UCP values. However, this approach is time-consuming, labor-intensive, and prone to inaccuracies, rendering it unsuitable for large-scale urban climate studies based on the LCZs framework. In contrast, alternative methods such as RS and simulation modeling can be more effectively employed for UCPs measurements. These methods offer a more efficient and accurate means of collecting UCPs, enabling a comprehensive and reliable analysis of urban climate patterns and their impact on human well-being and the environment. Furthermore, there is a pressing need to establish standardized procedures for measuring UCPs. Future research within the LCZs framework could emphasize the standardization of UCP calculation using RS and GIS data to ensure precise results.

Calculating urban heat island intensity using the LCZs framework

The LCZs framework method focuses on defining the UHI magnitude using the temperature difference between LCZs, represented by ΔT LCZ X-LCZ D , rather than the traditional “urban-rural” temperature difference (ΔT u-r ) (Stewart and Oke 2012 ). Here, LCZ X denotes any class within the LCZs classification system, while the temperature of LCZ D (low plants) serves as the baseline. This calculation method not only offers a more physically grounded understanding of UHII but also enhances its analysis and comparability. Numerous studies have affirmed the efficacy of the LCZs-based UHII calculation method. For example, Shi et al. ( 2021 ) computed surface urban heat island (SUHI) intensity by analyzing the difference in land surface temperature (LST) between LCZs and compared it with the conventional “urban-rural dichotomy” method. The results revealed that the LCZs-based UHII calculation method yielded a more precise measure of SUHI intensity. Similarly, Budhiraja et al. ( 2019 ) examined the seasonal SUHI intensity of Delhi using both LCZs-based and “urban-rural dichotomy” methods, concluding that the former provided a more detailed understanding of the relationship between urban structure and SUHI.

Two primary UHI types were assessed using the LCZs-based UHII calculation method: atmospheric urban heat island (AUHI) and SUHI. Concerning AUHI, Chen et al. ( 2021 ) explored the connection between the diurnal temperature range and AUHI intensity using the LCZs-based UHII calculation method under varying meteorological conditions categorized by precipitation. Yang et al. ( 2017 ) investigated the characteristics of local AUHI at selected LCZ sites, employing the LCZs-based UHII calculation method. Regarding SUHI, Wang et al. ( 2021 ) calculated surface urban heat island intensity (SUHII) using this method and proposed a sustainable urban green infrastructure planning strategy based on the analysis results. O’Malley and Kikumoto ( 2022 ) delved into heat storage in Tokyo Prefecture, utilizing the LCZs-based UHII calculation method to compute nocturnal-diurnal SUHI differences. Finally, Zheng et al. ( 2022 ) scrutinized the changes of LCZs and surface SUHII within Chang-Zhu-Tan’s primary urban area, employing the LCZs-based UHII calculation method.

In conclusion, the LCZs-based UHII calculation method represents a significant advancement in UHI research. Its ability to capture localized UHI variations, enhance comparability across regions, and guide targeted mitigation strategies makes it a valuable tool for urban planning and climate adaptation. However, addressing data challenges and standardization issues will be crucial to fully realize its potential for widespread application. Further research should focus on refining data acquisition and measurement techniques within the LCZs framework to ensure the accuracy and reliability of UHII assessments.

Recent advancements in manual sampling and mapping methods of LCZs research

This section explores the research methods employed within the LCZs framework for UHI research, specifically focusing on the manual sampling method for limited LCZs and LCZs mapping methods for large-scale applications.

Manual sampling method for limited LCZs

In the early stages of UHI research based on the LCZs framework, the primary emphasis was on LCZs classification through a manual sampling approach. This method involved the identification of LCZ types for a limited number of land parcels using manual techniques, such as scrutinizing satellite images, live photos, and conducting field surveys, for urban climate investigations. For instance, Yang et al. ( 2017 ) conducted a study examining the local UHI characteristics across 12 LCZs. These LCZs were selected based on a thorough review of satellite images, street-level views, and on-site fieldwork. In another research endeavor, Yang et al. ( 2018 ) investigated 14 distinct LCZs using field data and high-resolution satellite images to analyze the thermal characteristics of each location.

However, it is important to note that the manual sampling method has limitations, particularly when applied to large-scale urban climate investigations. It necessitates a substantial number of researchers to manually identify the LCZ type of each plot, which is resource-intensive and time-consuming. Moreover, there is a risk of human error during the identification process, potentially compromising the accuracy and reliability of the results. Consequently, while the manual sampling method has proven valuable for in-depth studies focusing on limited LCZs, it may not be suitable for broader urban climate investigations within expansive urban areas. In such cases, alternative LCZs mapping methods are typically preferred to ensure efficiency and accuracy.

LCZs mapping methods

The evolution of the LCZs framework has given rise to LCZs mapping methods tailored for large-scale urban climate studies. These methods simplify the representation of urban climate within the LCZs framework, enabling comparative analyses across different cities and enhancing the universality and applicability of findings. Moreover, LCZs framework facilitates the transformation of “climate language,” supporting the development of climate-sensitive urban design. LCZs mapping methods can be categorized into two types based on their data sources and classification algorithms: GIS-based and RS-based mapping methods (Tamás et al. 2015 ).

GIS-based LCZs mapping method

The GIS-based LCZs mapping method comprises six main steps, as depicted in Fig. 5 (Quan and Bansal 2021 ). Initially, it involves collecting GIS data and defining BSUs to segment the urban environment into smaller blocks for LCZs classification. Subsequently, the UCPs values for each BSU are calculated using GIS data, and the LCZ type for each BSU is determined based on the LCZs framework. Finally, post-processing is carried out to merge adjacent units for simplification and size adjustment, ultimately leading to the generation and evaluation of the LCZs map. BSUs refer to the spatial scale of LCZ classification, and the size of a BSU must meet the size requirement of the LCZs framework. The definition of BSUs is typically divided into lot area polygons (Lelovics et al. 2014 , Unger et al. 2014 ), urban blocks (Wu et al. 2018 , Quan 2019 ), and regular grids (Chen et al. 2020a ). Additionally, pre-processing of the GIS data is often necessary before calculating the UCPs. Common pre-processing includes: (1) Data cleaning: GIS datasets may contain errors or inconsistencies, such as missing values, outliers, or topological errors. It’s important to clean the data to avoid inaccuracies. (2) Spatial resolution matching: GIS datasets may have different spatial resolutions, which can affect the accuracy of UCPs calculations. Pre-processing is necessary to resample or aggregate datasets to a common spatial resolution to ensure compatibility for analysis. (3) Others: Steps such as data normalization and data integration are performed as needed. Overall, pre-processing of GIS data is essential before calculating UCPs to ensure data cleanliness, compatibility, and suitability for analysis, leading to more accurate and reliable results.

General steps of GIS-based LCZs mapping method (Quan and Bansal 2021 ).

The use of GIS-based LCZs mapping has gained traction in urban climate studies since the pioneering study by Lelovics et al. ( 2014 ) in Hungary. For example, Quan et al. ( 2017 ) developed and tested a bottom-up, fine-grained 3D LCZs mapping method utilizing GIS and land cover data, with urban block units serving as BSUs. Geletič et al. ( 2019 ) employed the GIS-based LCZs mapping method to explore the inter-zone and intra-zone seasonal variations of SUHI in three central European cities.

Despite its precision, the GIS-based LCZs mapping method has limitations. Firstly, obtaining accurate and consistent ground truth data for calculating UCPs poses a significant challenge, leading to limited availability of urban data. The inability to acquire comprehensive and detailed datasets for estimating UCPs, particularly those related to thermal aspects, can significantly impact the accuracy of LCZs mapping. Secondly, the merging of BSUs exists in post-processing, making it challenging to find optimal solutions, particularly in intricate urban environments. This process may not fully capture the complexity of LCZs mapping.

RS-based LCZs mapping method

RS is a technology that leverages remote sensors to collect data from target objects and analyze it to extract valuable information. Advances in RS information acquisition, transmission, and storage technologies have diminished the limitations of RS applications due to improved data quality and the increased availability of multiple RS data sources (Liu et al. 2006 ). RS satellites streamline fieldwork complexity and time intervals while delivering quantifiable and qualitative data (Dhingra and Kumar 2019 ). Optical RS imagery is gradually favored for identifying and categorizing land types and has become a pivotal research area.

RS-based LCZs mapping methods also have several limitations. One key limitation is the spatial and temporal resolution of the RS data. RS data may not always provide complete coverage or may be affected by cloud cover, which means that RS images need to be processed for stitching. However, since the spatial and temporal resolution of different remotely sensed images may vary, the stitching process may impact the accuracy and completeness of the LCZs mapping. Additionally, RS-based LCZs mapping requires specialized knowledge in remote sensing and image processing, which can be a barrier for non-remote sensing professionals. This limitation restricts the widespread application of RS-based LCZs mapping in urban planning and climate studies.

However, compared to GIS-based approaches, RS-based LCZs mapping methods offer several advantages, including higher resolution, finer spatial and temporal data, and the ability to quickly cover large areas. As a result, RS-based LCZs mapping has become the preferred approach for LCZs classification.

To enhance the accuracy of LCZs map classification, RS researchers have employed various benchmark datasets and classifiers. Regarding the benchmark dataset, Hu et al. ( 2018 ) utilized Sentinel-1 Dual-Pol data in LCZs mapping. Yang et al. ( 2020b ) employed multi-source datasets, including Luojia1-01 nighttime light imagery, Landsat-8, Sentinel-2, and building vector data, to generate LCZs maps. They found that a combination of object-based and pixel-based data with multi-source data improved LCZs mapping workflow. Machine learning classifiers, such as random forests and support vector machines (Xu et al. 2017 , Hu et al. 2018 , Hay Chung et al. 2021 ), are widely used for LCZs classification based on free multi-temporal RS data. In recent years, deep learning techniques have also been employed in RS-based LCZs mapping, as artificial intelligence has advanced. For example, Liu et al. ( 2019 ) combined object-based image analysis with convolutional neural networks (CNN) for LCZs mapping. Huang et al. ( 2021 ) introduced a CNN-based LCZ classification model for LCZs mapping in 32 Chinese cities. Their model achieved high overall accuracy in more than 50% of the cities.

Urban climate studies based on the LCZs framework face notable challenges due to the demand for expertise in meteorological science, RS, and machine learning, as well as data availability issues and non-standardized urban description methods. To address these challenges, Bechtel et al. ( 2015 ) proposed the world urban database and access portal tool (WUDAPT) protocol for LCZs mapping, which was developed ultimately into the LCZs generator (Demuzere et al. 2021 ), an online platform that generates LCZs mapping solely needing a training area file as input and also provides automated accuracy assessment. This approach aims to collect, store, and disseminate climate-related data on urban physical geography globally. The WUDAPT approach merges local expert knowledge with the LCZs framework to categorize the urban landscape into LCZs, generating LCZs maps for urban regions. The WUDAPT, outlined in Fig. 6 , has been widely adopted for urban climate studies in numerous regions. For example, Demuzere et al. ( 2022 ) generated a 100 m-resolution global LCZs map, accessible for download at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6364594 . Cai et al. ( 2018 ) created an LCZs map for the Yangtze River Delta megaregion in China. Ren et al. ( 2019 ) generated LCZs maps for over 20 cities and three major economic regions in China, offering recommendations for enhancement. Demuzere et al. ( 2019 ) constructed LCZs maps for Europe. Beyond urban climate studies, WUDAPT finds applications in various domains, including urban pollution (Shi et al. 2019 ) and multi-scale urban atmospheric modeling (Ching et al. 2019 ).

WUDAPT workflow (Bechtel et al. 2015 ).

LCZs mapping methods represent a pivotal advancement within the LCZs framework, enabling more extensive and systematic urban climate studies. These methods are indispensable for gaining insights into urban climatology, which is crucial for informed urban planning and climate-responsive urban design. While both GIS-based and RS-based LCZs mapping methods offer advantages, it’s essential to consider their respective strengths and limitations. GIS-based approaches provide high precision but may suffer from data availability issues and the complexity of post-processing. In contrast, RS-based methods offer freely available multi-temporal data and can quickly capture large-scale urban environments but may require extensive computational resources and expertise. The integration of machine learning and deep learning techniques into RS-based LCZs mapping has significantly improved classification accuracy and efficiency. However, these methods often demand large training datasets and computational resources. Further research should focus on optimizing these techniques for resource-constrained environments. The WUDAPT protocol stands out as a promising approach for LCZs mapping, offering generality, simplicity, and objectivity. Its reliance on local expert knowledge enhances accuracy, especially in areas with limited data availability. However, challenges persist in implementing this protocol universally, particularly in regions lacking local expertise.

In summary, LCZs mapping methods represent a pivotal milestone in urban climate research. They offer versatile tools for understanding and addressing the UHI effect and other climate-related urban challenges. As technology and data availability continue to advance, these methods are poised to play an increasingly prominent role in shaping sustainable and climate-resilient cities.

Application of LCZs framework in various scenarios

The application domains of the LCZs framework can be categorized and analyzed based on the keywords found in the screened literature. This analysis spans three principal areas: (1) LCZs framework in UHI studies: The primary application of the LCZs framework remains in the domain of UHI research. It provides a valuable tool for investigating the causes and consequences of UHIs, helping researchers better comprehend their impacts on urban climates and devising strategies to mitigate them. Given the growing significance of UHI effects in urban areas, continued research in this area is essential. (2) LCZs research contributions to urban design and climate change mitigation: LCZs research also makes substantial contributions to urban design and climate change mitigation efforts. The framework enables a more refined understanding of how urban structures and land use impact local climates. Consequently, it aids urban planners and policymakers in developing climate-sensitive urban designs and strategies to reduce the UHI effect and its associated challenges. (3) LCZs framework in diverse fields: LCZs research has found applications in various other domains, such as urban ventilation, precipitation, thermal comfort, carbon emissions, and building energy consumption. This indicates the versatility of the LCZs framework and its potential to inform a broad spectrum of urban-related research.

In summary, the LCZs framework has evolved to become a valuable tool in various research scenarios. While its origins lie in addressing UHI research limitations, it now extends its influence to inform urban design, climate change mitigation, and a range of interdisciplinary studies. Its adaptability and versatility underscore the continued relevance of LCZs research in addressing contemporary urban challenges.

LCZs framework in urban heat island studies

UHI research is crucial for understanding the impact of urban environments and devising strategies to mitigate UHI effects. Traditional studies have focused on 2D built environment parameters, such as building density, road density, and green space area, extracted from available data sources like weather data or satellite imagery for 2D planar UHI studies. Recent investigations have revealed that 3D built environment factors, including building height and SVF, have a more substantial influence on UHI than the 2D parameters (Luo et al. 2023 ). Consequently, there is a growing need for research that assesses and characterizes UHI through 3D spatial analysis, rather than the planar UHI estimation (Kim and Brown 2021 ). The LCZs system, which integrates both 2D and 3D UCPs, is well-suited for 3D UHI studies and can contribute to advancing the understanding of UHI and its influencing factors.

Table 4 provides examples of UHI research conducted using the LCZs framework, covering various climate types and research contents. These studies span different climate types, including tropical, subtropical, temperate, and more. UHI research typically falls into two categories: SUHI, which concerns the temperature difference between urban and rural areas at the surface level, and AUHI, which examines corresponding air temperature differences. Temperature variables in UHI studies can further be categorized into LST and air temperature, depending on the type of UHI under investigation. Research objectives encompass the identification, influencing factors, and mitigation strategies associated with UHI. UHI studies employ four primary measurement methods, including fixed measurement (utilizing fixed meteorological stations or establishing stationary observation points for thermal environment measurements), mobile measurement (employing mobile vehicles equipped with climate observation instruments to collect and record climate data along predefined routes), ground measurement (retrieving LST using thermal infrared data), and numerical simulation.

Given the dispersed nature of measurement points and the limited equipment available for LCZs investigations, many UHI studies opt for mobile measurement or LST retrieval methods to gather temperature data across extensive areas. Furthermore, contemporary LCZs framework research has shifted its focus from single-city examinations to comparative analyses between cities. This shift highlights the generalizability of the LCZs framework and its contributions to the growing trend of multi-regional urban climate research.

LCZs research contributions to urban design and climate change mitigation

Well-planned cities are essential for achieving sustainable urban development (Bai 2018 ). Climate-sensitive urban design plays a pivotal role in addressing the challenges posed by rising temperatures, which threaten residents’ thermal comfort (Kim and Brown 2021 ). However, existing urban planning systems struggle to cope with the complexities of local, regional, and global warming. Integrating climate considerations into data requirements and analysis methods is crucial for practical urban design applications (Perera and Emmanuel 2018 ).

The development of urban climate mapping systems has emerged as a responsive tool for climate-conscious urban planning. LCZs offer a structured classification system for land surface characteristics, forming the basis for surface parameterization methods (Ren et al. 2011 , Jin et al. 2020 ). LCZs facilitate the examination of the relationship between urban morphology and climate, providing meteorological data that informs building and urban design decisions. This framework has yielded significant insights into climate-responsive urban design, as exemplified by recent research endeavors.

For instance, Perera and Emmanuel ( 2018 ) utilized the LCZs framework to guide urban planning in Colombo, establishing it as a valuable theoretical foundation for crafting climate-sensitive cities. Likewise, Maharoof et al. ( 2020 ) applied the LCZs framework to investigate the implementation of climate-sensitive urban planning in densely populated urban areas, as illustrated by their case study of Glasgow city center. Another study by Pradhesta et al. ( 2019 ) dissected the critical components of thermal comfort within the LCZs framework, emphasizing factors such as roughness feature height, packing density, surface cover, and thermal admittance of materials. These components prove pivotal in the design of urban spaces that prioritize residents’ thermal comfort.

In essence, the LCZs framework offers a powerful tool for formulating climate-sensitive urban design strategies that enhance the quality of life and the sustainability of our cities. Climate-conscious urban design based on LCZs revolves around several key facets:

i) Green infrastructure: Integrating green infrastructure into urban planning stands as a critical measure for mitigating the effects of climate change on cities and their inhabitants. A comprehensive evaluation by Emmanuel and Loconsole ( 2015 ) underscores the effectiveness of green infrastructure options in combatting urban overheating, particularly within the context of a warming climate. Notably, increasing green coverage by approximately 20% over current levels could potentially eliminate up to half of the projected extra UHI effect by 2050 (Emmanuel and Loconsole 2015 ). Further insights from Kotharkar et al. ( 2020 ) reveal that greening initiatives not only serve as cooling strategies but also enhance pedestrian-level comfort. Intriguingly, their research highlights the superior results achieved by planting vegetation along streets, as opposed to concentrating greenery in designated areas. Li et al. ( 2022b ) further advocate for the moderation of SUHI through the strategic implementation of urban blue-green infrastructure. Stepani and Emmanuel ( 2022 ) advocate optimizing green spaces within public realms rather than merely increasing their quantity, emphasizing that climate-responsive design necessitates a diverse array of solutions, extending beyond green infrastructure.

ii) Blue infrastructure: The concept of blue infrastructure encompasses a network of natural and artificial water systems, including rivers, lakes, canals, and drainage systems, which serve as vital resources for human communities. Li et al. ( 2022b ) recommended harnessing the seasonal variations and spatial distribution of water bodies to enhance the cooling performance of LCZ G (Water). Factors such as distance and flow rates within rivers significantly influence the cooling effects, making them key considerations for urban planners and policymakers. Furthermore, they stress the importance of accounting for the growing risks of floods and droughts in East African cities, necessitating the design of blue infrastructure capable of adapting to seasonal variations and changing climates.

iii) Building design: Building resilience to climate change-induced extreme weather events is a crucial consideration in urban design. Passive cooling strategies, including cool roofs, emerge as effective means to reduce energy consumption and mitigate the UHI effect. Kotharkar et al. ( 2020 ) highlight the efficacy of cool roofs, specially designed to reflect more sunlight and absorb less heat than traditional roofing materials, particularly in densely populated urban areas.

iv) Street design: Urban streets represent a significant component of contemporary urban planning, encompassing approximately one-quarter of urban areas. They wield considerable influence in shaping comfortable urban environments. However, the climate-sensitive street design goes beyond rigid one-size-fits-all approaches. Maharoof et al. ( 2020 ) advocate for the integration of LCZ parameters with form-based considerations such as orientation and façade geometry. This nuanced approach recognizes that different street typologies may demand distinct design strategies, underscoring the importance of tailoring designs to specific urban contexts.

v) Other considerations: Research by O’Malley and Kikumoto ( 2022 ) suggests that mitigating UHI effects can be achieved through constructing lower-rise and open LCZs. They note that high-rise buildings possess larger heat storage capacities relative to lower-rise structures. Additionally, Zheng et al. ( 2022 ) proposed the full utilization of the cooling potential inherent in LCZ A-D and LCZ G and emphasized the need for judicious regulation of construction land areas (built LCZs) in future urban development plans.

Leveraging insights from LCZs-based research, climate-sensitive urban design should center around the integration of green and blue infrastructure, innovative building design, and flexible street design elements to counter the adverse impacts of climate change and foster the creation of sustainable, climate-responsive urban environments.

i) Green-blue infrastructure: Urban areas can benefit significantly from nature-based solutions, such as green roofs, gardens, and urban forests. These solutions serve dual purposes, including mitigating the negative impacts of climate change and promoting biodiversity. Furthermore, green corridors, such as tree-lined streets and bike paths, serve as multifunctional assets. They not only improve air quality but also offer enhanced mobility options for residents and reduce noise pollution. Water features, such as fountains and ponds, not only enhance the aesthetic appeal of public spaces but also provide cooling through evaporation.

ii) Building design: To mitigate UHI effects, building design should incorporate various strategies, including green roofs, cool roofs, shade provision, and sustainable materials. Green roofs are particularly advantageous because they contribute to cooling both buildings and their surroundings by absorbing and subsequently releasing moisture through transpiration. Additionally, cool roofs reflect sunlight and possess lower heat absorption than traditional roofing materials. The reduction in heat transfer into buildings beneath the roof not only lowers cooling costs but also enhances indoor comfort during hot weather. Moreover, building design can introduce shading solutions in outdoor areas, thereby reducing the amount of sunlight absorbed by buildings and their surroundings, thus contributing to cooler environments. Sustainable building materials, such as recycled steel, bamboo, and reclaimed wood, can play a pivotal role in reducing the environmental footprint of construction, ensuring that buildings are more sustainable, efficient, and comfortable.

iii) Street design: The design of urban streets plays a crucial role in mitigating UHI effects. Incorporating vegetation, green roofs, and other green elements into street design can effectively provide shade and evaporative cooling. Furthermore, using permeable pavement materials allows rainwater to penetrate the surface, promoting evaporation and reducing the amount of heat absorbed and re-emitted by the pavement. This is particularly important as impervious surfaces, like concrete and asphalt, tend to absorb and re-emit substantial amounts of heat, exacerbating UHI effects. By reducing the prevalence of impervious surfaces in street design, the adverse impacts of UHI can be mitigated. Additionally, thoughtful street furniture design, including streetlights and bus shelters, can be employed to provide shade and further reduce UHI effects.

In summary, urban design strategies that incorporate green-blue infrastructure, utilize innovative building design techniques, and employ street design elements prioritizing vegetation and sustainability offer comprehensive solutions to mitigate the adverse effects of UHI. These strategies enhance the overall resilience and comfort of urban areas, preparing them for the challenges posed by climate change.

Applications of the LCZs framework in other domains

Urban climate studies.

Beyond its primary application in UHI studies, the LCZs framework offers substantial utility across various domains of urban climate research. This adaptable framework enables researchers to explore both spatial and temporal dynamics of ventilation and precipitation patterns at a local scale, providing crucial insights for developing effective strategies to mitigate the environmental and health impacts of urbanization. For instance, Zhao et al. ( 2020 ) effectively employed the LCZs framework to analyze local-scale urban ventilation performance in Shenyang. In another study, Yang et al. ( 2019a ) evaluated the ventilation efficiency of different LCZs in Shanghai by assessing the frontal area index across various LCZ types. Chen et al. ( 2021 ) conducted a quantitative assessment of the relationship between daily temperature variations and UHII under varying meteorological conditions, classifying data using precipitation as a criterion. Additionally, Shi et al. ( 2022 ) assessed the influence of urban ventilation corridors on UHII using the LCZs framework. Yang et al. ( 2020c ) explored the spatial and temporal variations in humidity within the urban canopy across eight LCZ plots in Nanjing, analyzing the interplay between humidity differences, condensation precipitation events, meteorological parameters, and UHI. In a related study, Savić et al. ( 2020 ) scrutinized precipitation patterns in different urbanization settings by segregating areas into “urbanized” and “non-urbanized” based on LCZs classifications.

In summation, the utilization of the LCZs framework within urban climate research enhances our comprehension of the intricate connections between urban design and the multifaceted facets of urban climate. This broader perspective empowers researchers to devise effective strategies aimed at mitigating the repercussions of urbanization on the environment and human well-being, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of urban living conditions.

Enhancing outdoor thermal comfort

The quality of outdoor thermal comfort significantly influences the livability of urban areas. Changes in urban surfaces can substantially affect LST, consequently leading to elevated air temperatures and increased heat stress on urban residents (Lau et al. 2019 ). The LCZs framework proves to be a valuable tool in advancing research on outdoor thermal comfort by capturing the nuances of urban surface characteristics. For instance, Lau et al. ( 2019 ) employed a combination of questionnaires and field measurements to gauge subjective thermal sensations within eight distinct LCZs in Hong Kong. Unger et al. ( 2018 ) examined daily and seasonal fluctuations of outdoor human thermal perceptions, scrutinizing diverse LCZ types based on meteorological data. On a quantitative note, Liu et al. ( 2018 ) analytically assessed the levels of outdoor thermal comfort within nine LCZs in Shenzhen, dissecting the impact of various urban spatial characteristics. Schibuola and Tambani ( 2022 ) engaged in an evaluation of outdoor thermal comfort using the LCZs framework, offering a basis for comparative analysis of mitigation strategies. Meanwhile, Unal Cilek and Uslu ( 2022 ) analyzed the thermal conditions in urban green spaces across three distinct canopy cover scenarios using LCZs framework. Lastly, Wu et al. ( 2022 ) assessed the thermal comfort levels in Shenzhen throughout the year 2020 based on the LCZs framework.

These studies demonstrate that the LCZs framework enables a more profound comprehension of how urban surface characteristics affect outdoor thermal comfort. This understanding is crucial for developing and optimizing mitigation strategies in urban planning and design to enhance the quality of life and comfort for urban residents.

Tackling carbon emissions and building energy consumption

Cities play a significant role in global energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions (Zhou 2022b ), making the development of sustainable urban areas pivotal for achieving climate stability objectives (Zhou 2023 , Zhou et al. 2023 ). The form and function of the built environment closely intertwine with its carbon emission patterns. Hence, the LCZs framework emerges as a valuable tool for research focused on mitigating carbon emissions and optimizing building energy efficiency. Through the creation of a regional carbon map grounded in the LCZs framework, researchers can furnish urban planners and decision-makers with crucial insights into urban carbon emissions, thereby bolstering strategic initiatives for carbon reduction and management.

Recent studies have harnessed the potential of the LCZs framework to scrutinize and chart building carbon emissions and energy utilization within urban landscapes. Notably, Wu et al. ( 2018 ) established correlations between building carbon emissions and LCZs classifications, culminating in a detailed mapping of LCZs-based building carbon emissions in Shanghai. This research enables a granular understanding of urban-scale carbon dynamics, essential for localized mitigation efforts. Additionally, Sharifi et al. ( 2018 ) introduced a novel LCZs-based urban carbon mapping method, offering a standardized approach to urban carbon assessment. This method found application in major global cities like Bangkok, Shanghai, and Tokyo, facilitating comprehensive carbon analysis. Moreover, the adaptability of the LCZs framework extends to energy consumption assessments for city-level energy management and planning. For instance, Yang et al. ( 2019b ) devised a diagnostic equation for daily maximum UHI indices grounded in the LCZs framework, effectively applying it to simulate building energy consumption. In a similar vein, Kotharkar et al. ( 2022 ) explored cooling loads and energy requisites for two distinct building typologies, leveraging the LCZs framework for insights into energy planning.

Collectively, these studies underscore the versatility and promise of the LCZs framework in guiding urban sustainability endeavors and informed energy planning, ultimately steering cities toward a greener, more energy-efficient future.

Limitations, challenges, and future prospects

Limitations and challenges.

While the LCZs framework presents a promising avenue for standardizing the exchange of global urban temperature data, its widespread adoption faces challenges due to the lack of a unified approach to data sourcing and LCZs classification, leading to inconsistencies in LCZs framework research. To ensure methodological consistency, it is essential to establish a standardized LCZs framework research protocol. The WUDAPT method, designed for data sharing and user-friendliness, shows promise for future urban climate studies based on LCZs mapping. However, a critical challenge remains in improving this method’s accuracy. Consequently, a key concern in LCZs research is developing a large-scale, effective, and precise LCZs mapping approach by leveraging various benchmark datasets and classifiers. This paper highlights current issues in the LCZs mapping process and suggests potential enhancements.

i) Data availability: Data availability poses significant challenges for LCZs mapping, stemming from several factors. These include limitations in the spatial and temporal resolution of RS data, difficulties in obtaining accurate and consistent ground truth data for calculating UCPs, the high cost associated with accessing high-quality RS data, etc. These challenges emphasize the need for a generalizable framework that addresses data availability issues. The WUDAPT team is actively working towards this goal and has curated a list of datasets for UCPs calculation, including building data, tree data, and urban population data, which can be accessed on the official website ( https://www.wudapt.org/third-party-data/ ).

ii) RS-based mapping: RS-based mapping predominantly relies on freely available Landsat satellite image data. However, the limited image resolution of Landsat data can compromise LCZs mapping accuracy. To mitigate this limitation, the use of low-cost and user-friendly unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) devices for high-resolution RS image capture is worth considering. This approach can mitigate the impact of weather conditions and cloud cover on images, ultimately enhancing the precision of training sample identification and LCZs classification.

iii) Training samples: The overall accuracy of the WUDAPT method depends on the precise identification of LCZ types within the training samples. However, challenges may arise during data collection and UCPs calculation due to limited professional knowledge among researchers, potentially leading to inaccurate LCZs identification. To mitigate these challenges, the accuracy of training sample recognition can be improved through the standardization of data collection and UCPs calculation processes. This will help reduce subjective errors and address expertise-related constraints that can hinder manual recognition.

iv) Classifier: Apart from training samples, the classifier’s ability to achieve high-precision LCZ type recognition is pivotal in LCZs mapping research. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, particularly deep learning, have revolutionized image recognition and found widespread application in image classification tasks. Consequently, the emerging trend is to leverage neural network algorithms to achieve large-scale, efficient, and precise LCZs mapping.

By addressing these challenges and limitations, the LCZs framework can evolve into a more robust tool for urban climate research and planning, ensuring improved accuracy and consistency across studies.

Future prospects

The LCZs framework’s generality, simplicity, and objectivity make it remarkably versatile, positioning it for extensive application across various future research domains. Beyond its current role in UHI effect research, the framework exhibits potential for a plethora of other areas, such as urban design, outdoor thermal comfort, carbon emissions, building energy consumption. The trajectory of LCZs framework research can be delineated into the following directions:

i) Enhancing understanding of UHI: Previous studies evaluating UHI effects have predominantly relied on 2D planar analysis, which does not account for the 3D physical form of cities. The LCZs framework provides an avenue for 3D spatial analysis, facilitating a more comprehensive evaluation of UHII. This advancement can significantly enhance our understanding of UHI effects and foster the development of innovative UHI mitigation strategies.

ii) Urban design: The LCZs framework serves as a valuable tool for identifying climate risks within urban areas. Urban planners, government decision-makers, and stakeholders can leverage this framework to formulate plans for climate-sensitive urban development, thereby promoting the creation of sustainable and resilient cities. Through the utilization of the LCZs framework, these stakeholders can gain valuable insights into potential climate risks, enabling them to proactively implement measures that enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of urban planning and development.

iii) Exploring complex urban climates: While recent urban climate studies have started to consider the influence of complex geographical factors such as topography and water bodies, there remains a research gap concerning mountainous cities. These cities, characterized by unique topographical elements and complex urban climates, have received comparatively less research attention. Therefore, future urban climate research can delve into the analysis of urban climates in mountainous cities using the LCZs framework. By leveraging this framework, researchers can gain a deeper understanding of the intricate interactions between topographical features and urban climates in these unique settings.

iv) LCZs-based economic-environmental analysis: Economic-environmental analysis aids policymakers and businesses in harmonizing economic growth with environmental sustainability by quantifying the environmental impacts of economic activities (Zhou 2022a ). Future LCZs research can evolve towards economic-environmental analysis. The LCZs framework provides a foundational understanding of urban physical characteristics and functions, which can be correlated with economic activities and environmental impacts. Integrating economic analysis into LCZ studies, such as integrating lifecycle assessment methods to quantify the environmental impacts of various urban development scenarios, enables researchers to investigate the cost-effectiveness of diverse urban development strategies, evaluate the economic implications of carbon emission reduction, and assess the financial advantages of sustainable building practices.

These future research directions promise to further amplify the applicability and impact of the LCZs framework in urban climate studies, urban planning, economic activities, and climate-conscious urban development.

Conclusions

This study provides a systematic and critical overview of LCZs framework research, exploring its evolution, current status, and future prospects based on recent advancements. It underscores the LCZs classification system’s effectiveness in guiding climate-responsive planning and design. The study’s key contributions are summarized as follows:

1) The proliferation of publications on the LCZs framework has been remarkable, escalating from 17 in 2013 to 300 in 2022. This surge in research reflects a prominent trend towards interdisciplinary collaboration, with LCZs research encompassing ten primary categories, including meteorology atmospheric sciences, environmental sciences ecology, and physical sciences among others.

2) The ongoing challenge of achieving large-scale, efficient, and accurate LCZs mapping remains a central concern in LCZs research. Efforts to address this challenge have been underway, with researchers integrating diverse benchmark datasets, employing UAVs, and utilizing deep learning classifiers.

3) In the realm of UHI studies, the LCZs framework has demonstrated its suitability for 3D UHI analysis, enriching the comprehension of UHI dynamics and their repercussions on urban environments. Recent LCZs framework investigations have evolved from single-city analyses to comparative studies encompassing multiple cities. Moving forward, the LCZs framework holds promise for deciphering the complexities of urban climates influenced by intricate geographical factors.

4) For climate-responsive urban design, the LCZs framework serves as an invaluable instrument for devising strategies that prioritize climate sensitivity in urban planning and development. The integration of green and blue infrastructure, building design principles, and innovative street design emerges as fundamental elements in fostering climate-conscious cities through the LCZs framework.

5) The LCZs framework exhibits versatility across various research domains, including outdoor thermal comfort, carbon emissions analysis, and building energy consumption assessments. Its application contributes significantly to advancing ecological urban construction and promoting sustainable urban development.

In summation, the LCZs framework stands out as a powerful instrument with broad implications for urban climate research, urban planning, and the advancement of climate-resilient and sustainable cities. Its ongoing evolution and refinement are poised to catalyze innovation and advancements in these crucial domains.

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Alexander PJ, Mills G (2014) Local Climate Classification and Dublin’s Urban Heat Island. Atmosphere 5:755–774. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos5040755

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Aslam A, Rana IA (2022) The use of local climate zones in the urban environment: A systematic review of data sources, methods, and themes. Urban Clim. 42:101120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101120

Article   Google Scholar  

Bai X (2018) Advance the ecosystem approach in cities. Nature 559:7–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05607-x

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Balchin WGV, Pye N (1947) A micro-climatological investigation of bath and the surrounding district. Q J. R. Meteor Soc. 73:297–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49707331706

Bartmiński P, Siłuch M (2022) Mapping the albedo of the active surface at different stages of the growing season using data from various sources. Remote Sens Appl 28:100818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2022.100818

Bechtel B, Alexander P, Böhner J, Ching J, Conrad O, Feddema J, Mills G, See L, Stewart I (2015) Mapping Local Climate Zones for a Worldwide Database of the Form and Function of Cities. ISPRS Int J. Geo-Inf. 4:199–219. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi4010199

Benjamin K, Luo Z, Wang X (2021) Crowdsourcing Urban Air Temperature Data for Estimating Urban Heat Island and Building Heating/Cooling Load in London. Energies 14:5208. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14165208

Budhiraja B, Gawuc L, Agrawal G (2019) Seasonality of Surface Urban Heat Island in Delhi City Region Measured by Local Climate Zones and Conventional Indicators. IEEE J.-STARS 12:5223–5232. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2019.2955133

Cai M, Ren C, Xu Y, Lau KK-L, Wang R (2018) Investigating the relationship between local climate zone and land surface temperature using an improved WUDAPT methodology – A case study of Yangtze River Delta, China. Urban Clim. 24:485–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2017.05.010

Chen G, He M, Li N, He H, Cai Y, Zheng S (2021) A Method for Selecting the Typical Days with Full Urban Heat Island Development in Hot and Humid Area, Case Study in Guangzhou, China. Sustainability 13:320. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010320

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Chen Y, Zheng B, Hu Y (2020a) Mapping Local Climate Zones Using ArcGIS-Based Method and Exploring Land Surface Temperature Characteristics in Chenzhou, China. Sustainability 12:2974. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072974

Chen Y, Zheng B, Hu Y (2020b) Numerical Simulation of Local Climate Zone Cooling Achieved through Modification of Trees, Albedo and Green Roofs—A Case Study of Changsha, China. Sustainability 12:2752. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072752

Ching J, Aliaga D, Mills G, Masson V, See L, Neophytou M, Middel A, Baklanov A, Ren C, Ng E, Fung J, Wong M, Huang Y, Martilli A, Brousse O, Stewart I, Zhang X, Shehata A, Miao S, Wang X, Wang W, Yamagata Y, Duarte D, Li Y, Feddema J, Bechtel B, Hidalgo J, Roustan Y, Kim Y, Simon H, Kropp T, Bruse M, Lindberg F, Grimmond S, Demuzure M, Chen F, Li C, Gonzales-Cruz J, Bornstein B, He Q, Tzu-Ping, Hanna A, Erell E, Tapper N, Mall RK, Niyogi D (2019) Pathway using WUDAPT’s Digital Synthetic City tool towards generating urban canopy parameters for multi-scale urban atmospheric modeling. Urban Clim. 28:100459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2019.100459

Demuzere M, Kittner J, Bechtel B (2021) LCZ Generator: A Web Application to Create Local Climate Zone Maps. Front Env Sci. 9:637455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.637455

Demuzere M, Bechtel B, Middel A, Mills G (2019) Mapping Europe into local climate zones. Mourshed M (Ed.). PLOS ONE 14: e0214474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214474

Demuzere M, Kittner J, Martilli A, Mills G, Moede C, Stewart ID, van Vliet J, Bechtel B (2022) A global map of local climate zones to support earth system modelling and urban-scale environmental science. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14:3835–3873. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-3835-2022

Deng C, Wu C (2013) The use of single-date MODIS imagery for estimating large-scale urban impervious surface fraction with spectral mixture analysis and machine learning techniques. ISPRS J. Photogramm. 86:100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2013.09.010

Dhingra S, Kumar D (2019) A review of remotely sensed satellite image classification. IJECE 9:1720. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v9i3.pp1720-1731

Dong P, Jiang S, Zhan W, Wang C, Miao S, Du H, Li J, Wang S, Jiang L (2022) Diurnally continuous dynamics of surface urban heat island intensities of local climate zones with spatiotemporally enhanced satellite-derived land surface temperatures. Build Environ. 218:109105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109105

Emery J, Pohl B, Crétat J, Richard Y, Pergaud J, Rega M, Zito S, Dudek J, Vairet T, Joly D, Thévenin T (2021) How local climate zones influence urban air temperature: Measurements by bicycle in Dijon, France. Urban Clim. 40:101017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.101017

Emmanuel R, Loconsole A (2015) Green infrastructure as an adaptation approach to tackling urban overheating in the Glasgow Clyde Valley Region, UK. Landsc. Urban Plan 138:71–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.012

Fan PY, He Q, Tao YZ (2023) Identifying research progress, focuses, and prospects of local climate zone (LCZ) using bibliometrics and critical reviews. Heliyon 9:e14067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14067

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fernandes R, Nascimento V, Freitas M, Ometto J (2023) Local Climate Zones to Identify Surface Urban Heat Islands: A Systematic Review. Remote Sens 15:884. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15040884

Geletič J, Lehnert M, Dobrovolný P (2016) Land Surface Temperature Differences within Local Climate Zones, Based on Two Central European Cities. Remote Sens 8:788. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8100788

Geletič J, Lehnert M, Savić S, Milošević D (2019) Inter-/intra-zonal seasonal variability of the surface urban heat island based on local climate zones in three central European cities. Build Environ. 156:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.04.011

Guo H, Du B, Zhang L, Su X (2022) A coarse-to-fine boundary refinement network for building footprint extraction from remote sensing imagery. ISPRS J. Photogramm. 183:240–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.11.005

Hay Chung LC, Xie J, Ren C (2021) Improved machine-learning mapping of local climate zones in metropolitan areas using composite Earth observation data in Google Earth Engine. Build Environ. 199:107879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107879

Hu J, Ghamisi P, Zhu XX (2018) Feature Extraction and Selection of Sentinel-1 Dual-Pol Data for Global-Scale Local Climate Zone Classification. ISPRS Int J. Geo-Inf. 7:379. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7090379

Huang F, Jiang S, Zhan W, Bechtel B, Liu Z, Demuzere M, Huang Y, Xu Y, Ma L, Xia W, Quan J, Jiang L, Lai J, Wang C, Kong F, Du H, Miao S, Chen Y, Chen J (2023) Mapping local climate zones for cities: A large review. Remote Sens Environ. 292:113573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113573

Huang Q, Lu Y (2018) Urban heat island research from 1991 to 2015: a bibliometric analysis. Theor. Appl Climatol. 131:1055–1067. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-016-2025-1

Huang X, Liu A, Li J (2021) Mapping and analyzing the local climate zones in China’s 32 major cities using Landsat imagery based on a novel convolutional neural network. Geo-Spat. Inf. Sci. 24:528–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2021.1892459

Jiang S, Zhan W, Dong P, Wang C, Li J, Miao S, Jiang L, Du H, Wang C (2022) Surface air temperature differences of intra- and inter-local climate zones across diverse timescales and climates. Build Environ. 222:109396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109396

Jifroudi HM, Mansor SB, Pradhan B, Halin AA, Ahmad N, Abdullah AFB (2022) A new approach to derive buildings footprint from light detection and ranging data using rule-based learning techniques and decision tree. Measurement 192:110781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2022.110781

Jin L, Pan X, Liu L, Liu L, Liu J, Gao Y (2020) Block-based local climate zone approach to urban climate maps using the UDC model. Build Environ. 186:107334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107334

Kim SW, Brown RD (2021) Urban heat island (UHI) intensity and magnitude estimations: A systematic literature review. Sci. Total Environ. 779:146389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146389

Kopp J, Frajer J, Novotná M, Preis J, Dolejš M (2021) Comparison of Ecohydrological and Climatological Zoning of the Cities: Case Study of the City of Pilsen. ISPRS Int J. Geo-Inf. 10:350. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10050350

Kotharkar R, Bagade A (2018) Evaluating urban heat island in the critical local climate zones of an Indian city. Landsc. Urban Plan 169:92–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.08.009

Kotharkar R, Bagade A, Singh PR (2020) A systematic approach for urban heat island mitigation strategies in critical local climate zones of an Indian city. Urban Clim. 34:100701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2020.100701

Kotharkar R, Ghosh A, Kapoor S, Reddy DGK (2022) Approach to local climate zone based energy consumption assessment in an Indian city. Energ. Build. 259:111835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.111835

Lau KK-L, Chung SC, Ren C (2019) Outdoor thermal comfort in different urban settings of sub-tropical high-density cities: An approach of adopting local climate zone (LCZ) classification. Build Environ. 154:227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.03.005

Leconte F, Bouyer J, Claverie R, Pétrissans M (2015) Using Local Climate Zone scheme for UHI assessment: Evaluation of the method using mobile measurements. Build Environ. 83:39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.05.005

Leconte F, Bouyer J, Claverie R, Pétrissans M (2017) Analysis of nocturnal air temperature in districts using mobile measurements and a cooling indicator. Theor. Appl Clim. 130:365–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-016-1886-7

Lehnert M, Savić S, Milošević D, Dunjić J, Geletič J (2021) Mapping Local Climate Zones and Their Applications in European Urban Environments: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Development Trends. ISPRS Int J. Geo-Inf. 10:260. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214474

Lelovics E, Unger J, Gál T, Gál C (2014) Design of an urban monitoring network based on Local Climate Zone mapping and temperature pattern modelling. Clim. Res 60:51–62. https://doi.org/10.3354/cr01220

Li N, Wang B, Yao Y, Chen L, Zhang Z (2022a) Thermal Contribution of the Local Climate Zone and Its Spatial Distribution Effect on Land Surface Temperature in Different Macroclimate Cities. Remote Sens 14:4029. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14164029

Li X, Stringer LC, Dallimer M (2022b) The role of blue green infrastructure in the urban thermal environment across seasons and local climate zones in East Africa. Sustain Cities Soc. 80:103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103798

Liang J, Gong J, Sun J, Zhou J, Li W, Li Y, Liu J, Shen S (2017) Automatic Sky View Factor Estimation from Street View Photographs—A Big Data Approach. Remote Sens 9:411. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9050411

Liu L, Pan X, Jin L, Liu L, Liu J (2022) Association analysis on spatiotemporal characteristics of block-scale urban thermal environments based on a field mobile survey in Guangzhou, China. Urban Clim. 42:101131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101131

Liu L, Lin Y, Xiao Y, Xue P, Shi L, Chen X, Liu J (2018) Quantitative effects of urban spatial characteristics on outdoor thermal comfort based on the LCZ scheme. Build Environ. 143:443–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.07.019

Liu S, Qi Z, Li X, Yeh A (2019) Integration of Convolutional Neural Networks and Object-Based Post-Classification Refinement for Land Use and Land Cover Mapping with Optical and SAR Data. Remote Sens 11:690. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11060690

Liu X, Li X (2023) Luojia nighttime light data with a 130m spatial resolution providing a better measurement of gridded anthropogenic heat flux than VIIRS. Sustain Cities Soc. 94:104565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104565

Liu Y, Li M, Mao L, Xu F, Huang S (2006) Review of remotely sensed imagery classification patterns based on object-oriented image analysis. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 16:282–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11769-006-0282-0

Luo P, Yu B, Li P, Liang P, Liang Y, Yang L (2023) How 2D and 3D built environments impact urban surface temperature under extreme heat: A study in Chengdu, China. Build Environ. 231:110035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110035

Ma L, Zhu X, Qiu C, Blaschke T, Li M (2021) Advances of Local Climate Zone Mapping and Its Practice Using Object-Based Image Analysis. Atmosphere 12:1146. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12091146

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Maharoof N, Emmanuel R, Thomson C (2020) Compatibility of local climate zone parameters for climate sensitive street design: Influence of openness and surface properties on local climate. Urban Clim. 33:100642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2020.100642

Masson V (2000) A Physically-Based Scheme For The Urban Energy Budget In Atmospheric Models. Bound-Lay. Meteorol. 94:357–397. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002463829265

Matzarakis A, Rutz F, Mayer H (2007) Modelling radiation fluxes in simple and complex environments—application of the RayMan model. Int J. Biometeorol. 51:323–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-006-0061-8

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mo N, Han J, Yin Y, Zhang Y (2024) Seasonal analysis of land surface temperature using local climate zones in peak forest basin topography: A case study of Guilin. Build Environ. 247:111042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.111042

Mushore TD, Mutanga O, Odindi J (2022) Understanding Growth-Induced Trends in Local Climate Zones, Land Surface Temperature, and Extreme Temperature Events in a Rapidly Growing City: A Case of Bulawayo Metropolitan City in Zimbabwe. Front Env Sci. 10:910816. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.910816

Núñez Peiró M, Sánchez-Guevara Sánchez C, Neila González FJ (2019) Source area definition for local climate zones studies. A systematic review. Build Environ. 148:258–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.10.050

Nurwanda A (2018) City expansion and urban heat island in Bogor. IOP Conf. Ser: Earth Environ. Sci. 179:012007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/179/1/012007

O’Malley C, Kikumoto H (2022) An investigation into heat storage by adopting local climate zones and nocturnal-diurnal urban heat island differences in the Tokyo Prefecture. Sustain Cities Soc. 83:103959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103959

Peng W, Wang R, Duan J, Gao W, Fan Z (2022) Surface and canopy urban heat islands: Does urban morphology result in the spatiotemporal differences? Urban Clim. 42:101136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101136

Perera NGR, Emmanuel R (2018) A “Local Climate Zone” based approach to urban planning in Colombo, Sri Lanka. Urban Clim. 23:188–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2016.11.006

Pradhesta YF, Nurjani E, Arijuddin BI (2019) Local Climate Zone classification for climate-based urban planning using Landsat 8 Imagery (A case study in Yogyakarta Urban Area). IOP Conf. Ser: Earth Environ. Sci. 303:012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/303/1/012022

Quan J (2019) Enhanced geographic information system-based mapping of local climate zones in Beijing, China. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 62:2243–2260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-018-9417-6

Quan SJ, Bansal P (2021) A systematic review of GIS-based local climate zone mapping studies. Build Environ. 196:107791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107791

Quan SJ, Dutt F, Woodworth E, Yamagata Y, Yang PP-J (2017) Local Climate Zone Mapping for Energy Resilience: A Fine-grained and 3D Approach. Energy Procedia 105:3777–3783. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.883

Ren C, Ng EY, Katzschner L (2011) Urban climatic map studies: a review. Int J. Climatol. 31:2213–2233. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2237

Ren C, Cai M, Li X, Zhang L, Wang R, Xu Y, Ng E (2019) Assessment of Local Climate Zone Classification Maps of Cities in China and Feasible Refinements. Sci. Rep. 9:18848. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55444-9

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Savić S, Kalfayan M, Dolinaj D (2020) Precipitation spatial patterns in cities with different urbanisation types: Case study of Novi Sad (Serbia) as a medium-sized city. Geogr. Pannonica 24:88–99. https://doi.org/10.5937/gp24-25202

Schibuola L, Tambani C (2022) A monthly performance comparison of green infrastructures enhancing urban outdoor thermal comfort. Energ. Build. 273:112368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112368

Sharifi A, Wu Y, Khamchiangta D, Yoshida T, Yamagata Y (2018) Urban carbon mapping: Towards a standardized framework. Energy Procedia 152:799–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2018.09.193

Shi L, Ling F, Foody GM, Yang Z, Liu X, Du Y (2021) Seasonal SUHI Analysis Using Local Climate Zone Classification: A Case Study of Wuhan, China. Int J. Env Res Pub He 18:7242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18147242

Shi Y, Ren C, Lau KK-L, Ng E (2019) Investigating the influence of urban land use and landscape pattern on PM2.5 spatial variation using mobile monitoring and WUDAPT. Landsc. Urban Plan 189:15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.04.004

Shi Z, Yang J, Zhang Y, Xiao X, Xia JC (2022) Urban ventilation corridors and spatiotemporal divergence patterns of urban heat island intensity: a local climate zone perspective. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21037-9

Skarbit N, Stewart ID, Unger J, Gál T (2017) Employing an urban meteorological network to monitor air temperature conditions in the ‘local climate zones’ of Szeged, Hungary. Int J. Climatol. 37:582–596. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5023

Stepani HMN, Emmanuel R (2022) How Much Green Is Really “Cool”? Target Setting for Thermal Comfort Enhancement in a Warm, Humid City (Jakarta, Indonesia). Atmosphere 13:184. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13020184

Stewart ID, Oke TR (2012) Local Climate Zones for Urban Temperature Studies. B Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93:1879–1900. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00019.1

Steyn DG (1980) The calculation of view factors from fisheye‐lens photographs: Research note. Atmos.-Ocean 18:254–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/07055900.1980.9649091

Sytsma A, Bell C, Eisenstein W, Hogue T, Kondolf GM (2020) A geospatial approach for estimating hydrological connectivity of impervious surfaces. J. Hydrol. 591:125545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125545

Tahooni A, Kakroodi AA, Kiavarz M (2023) Monitoring of land surface albedo and its impact on land surface temperature (LST) using time series of remote sensing data. Ecol Inform: 102118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102118

Tamás G, Benjamin B, János U (2015) Comparison of two different Local Climate Zone mapping methods. ICUC9

Unal Cilek M, Uslu C (2022) Modeling the relationship between the geometric characteristics of urban green spaces and thermal comfort: The case of Adana city. Sustain Cities Soc. 79:103748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103748

Unger J, Lelovics E, Gál T (2014) Local Climate Zone mapping using GIS methods in Szeged. Hungarian Geographical Bull. 63:29–41. https://doi.org/10.15201/hungeobull.63.1.3

Unger J, Skarbit N, Gál T (2018) Evaluation of outdoor human thermal sensation of local climate zones based on long-term database. Int J. Biometeorol. 62:183–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-017-1440-z

UN-Habitat (2022) World Cities Report 2022: Envisaging the Future of Cities. United Nations

Wang C, Middel A, Myint SW, Kaplan S, Brazel AJ, Lukasczyk J (2018) Assessing local climate zones in arid cities: The case of Phoenix, Arizona and Las Vegas, Nevada. ISPRS J. Photogramm. 141:59–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2018.04.009

Wang R, Wang M, Zhang Z, Hu T, Xing J, He Z, Liu X (2022a) Geographical Detection of Urban Thermal Environment Based on the Local Climate Zones: A Case Study in Wuhan, China. Remote Sens 14:1067. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14051067

Wang Y, Ni Z, Hu M, Chen S, Xia B (2021) A practical approach of urban green infrastructure planning to mitigate urban overheating: A case study of Guangzhou. J. Clean. Prod. 287:124995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124995

Wang Y, Hu D, Yu C, Di Y, Wang S, Liu M (2022b) Appraising regional anthropogenic heat flux using high spatial resolution NTL and POI data: A case study in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. Environ. Pollut. 292:118359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118359

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Wei S, Zhang T, Ji S, Luo M, Gong J (2023) BuildMapper: A fully learnable framework for vectorized building contour extraction. ISPRS J. Photogramm. 197:87–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2023.01.015

Wu J, Liu C, Wang H (2022) Analysis of Spatio-temporal patterns and related factors of thermal comfort in subtropical coastal cities based on local climate zones. Build Environ. 207:108568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108568

Wu W-B, Ma J, Banzhaf E, Meadows ME, Yu Z-W, Guo F-X, Sengupta D, Cai X-X, Zhao B (2023) A first Chinese building height estimate at 10 m resolution (CNBH-10 m) using multi-source earth observations and machine learning. Remote Sens Environ. 291:113578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113578

Wu Y, Sharifi A, Yang P, Borjigin H, Murakami D, Yamagata Y (2018) Mapping building carbon emissions within local climate zones in Shanghai. Energy Procedia 152:815–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2018.09.195

Xia H, Chen Y, Song C, Li J, Quan J, Zhou G (2022) Analysis of surface urban heat islands based on local climate zones via spatiotemporally enhanced land surface temperature. Remote Sens Environ. 273:112972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2022.112972

Xu Y, Ren C, Cai M, Edward NYY, Wu T (2017) Classification of Local Climate Zones Using ASTER and Landsat Data for High-Density Cities. IEEE J.-STARS 10:3397–3405. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2017.2683484

Xue J, You R, Liu W, Chen C, Lai D (2020) Applications of Local Climate Zone Classification Scheme to Improve Urban Sustainability: A Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 12:8083. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198083

Yan Y, Huang B (2022) Estimation of building height using a single street view image via deep neural networks. ISPRS J. Photogramm. 192:83–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2022.08.006

Yang G, Fu Y, Yan M, Zhang J (2020a) Exploring the distribution of energy consumption in a northeast Chinese city based on local climate zone scheme: Shenyang city as a case study. Energy Explor Exploit 38:2079–2094. https://doi.org/10.1177/014459872095046

Yang J, Wang Y, Xiu C, Xiao X, Xia J, Jin C (2020b) Optimizing local climate zones to mitigate urban heat island effect in human settlements. J. Clean. Prod. 275:123767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123767

Yang J, Jin S, Xiao X, Jin C, Xia J, Li X, Wang S(2019) Local climate zone ventilation and urban land surface temperatures: Towards a performance-based and wind-sensitive planning proposal in megacities Sustain Cities Soc. 47:101487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101487

Yang R, Yang J, Wang L, Xiao X, Xia J (2022) Contribution of local climate zones to the thermal environment and energy demand. Front Public Health 10. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2022.992050

Yang X, Yao L, Zhu C, Jin T, Peng LL (2017) Analysis of Local Heat Islands in Nanjing, China, based on the Local Climate Zone Scheme. Procedia Eng. 205:2501–2508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.09.980

Yang X, Peng LLH, Chen Y, Yao L, Wang Q (2020c) Air humidity characteristics of local climate zones: A three-year observational study in Nanjing. Build Environ. 171:106661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106661

Yang X, Yao L, Peng LLH, Jiang Z, Jin T, Zhao L (2019b) Evaluation of a diagnostic equation for the daily maximum urban heat island intensity and its application to building energy simulations. Energ. Build. 193:160–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.001

Yang X, Yao L, Jin T, Peng LLH, Jiang Z, Hu Z, Ye Y (2018) Assessing the thermal behavior of different local climate zones in the Nanjing metropolis, China. Build Environ. 137:171–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.009

Yang X, Peng LLH, Jiang Z, Chen Y, Yao L, He Y, Xu T (2020d) Impact of urban heat island on energy demand in buildings: Local climate zones in Nanjing. Appl Energy 260:114279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114279

Yu B, Liu H, Wu J, Hu Y, Zhang L (2010) Automated derivation of urban building density information using airborne LiDAR data and object-based method. Landsc. Urban Plan 98:210–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.08.004

Yu C, Hu D, Wang S, Chen S, Wang Y (2021) Estimation of anthropogenic heat flux and its coupling analysis with urban building characteristics – A case study of typical cities in the Yangtze River Delta, China. Sci. Total Environ. 774:145805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145805

Yuan B, Zhou L, Hu F, Zhang Q (2022) Diurnal dynamics of heat exposure in Xi’an: A perspective from local climate zone. Build Environ. 222:109400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2022.109400

Zhang H, Yin Y, An H, Lei J, Li M, Song J, Han W (2022) Surface urban heat island and its relationship with land cover change in five urban agglomerations in China based on GEE. Environ Sci Pollut Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21452-y

Zhao Z, Shen L, Li L, Wang H, He B-J (2020) Local Climate Zone Classification Scheme Can Also Indicate Local-Scale Urban Ventilation Performance: An Evidence-Based Study. Atmosphere 11:776. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11080776

Zheng B, Chen Y, Hu Y (2022) Analysis of land cover and SUHII pattern using local climate zone framework—A case study of Chang-Zhu-Tan main urban area. Urban Clim. 43:101153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101153

Zhou L, Yuan B, Hu F, Wei C, Dang X, Sun D (2022) Understanding the effects of 2D/3D urban morphology on land surface temperature based on local climate zones. Build Environ. 208:108578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108578

Zhou Y (2022a) Energy sharing and trading on a novel spatiotemporal energy network in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Appl Energy 318:119131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119131

Zhou Y (2022b) Low-carbon transition in smart city with sustainable airport energy ecosystems and hydrogen-based renewable-grid-storage-flexibility. Energ. Rev. 1:100001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enrev.2022.100001

Zhou Y (2023) Worldwide carbon neutrality transition? Energy efficiency, renewable, carbon trading and advanced energy policies. Energ. Rev. 2:100026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enrev.2023.100026

Zhou Y, Zheng S, Lei J, Zi Y (2023) A cross-scale modelling and decarbonisation quantification approach for navigating Carbon Neutrality Pathways in China. Energ. Convers. Manag. 297:117733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117733

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Innovation Project of Guangxi Graduate Education (YCSW2023306), Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi Province of China (No.2018GXNSFAA281212).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Architecture and Transportation Engineering, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, China

Jie Han, Nan Mo & Jingyi Cai

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Akron, Akron, OH, USA

Leixin Ouyang

Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands

Zhengxuan Liu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Jie Han: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Writing—original draft. Nan Mo: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing—original draft. Jingyi Cai: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing—review & editing. Leixin Ouyang: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation. Zhengxuan Liu: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhengxuan Liu .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Ethical approval was not required as the study did not involve human participants

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Han, J., Mo, N., Cai, J. et al. Advancing the local climate zones framework: a critical review of methodological progress, persisting challenges, and future research prospects. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 538 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03072-8

Download citation

Received : 21 October 2023

Accepted : 17 April 2024

Published : 27 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03072-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

International Surveys

Pew Research Center regularly conducts public opinion surveys in countries outside the United States as part of its ongoing exploration of attitudes, values and behaviors around the globe. To date, the Center has conducted more than 800,000 interviews in over 110 countries, mainly in conjunction with the longstanding Global Attitudes and Religion & Public Life projects but including others such as a 20-country international science study and another on digital connectivity in 11 emerging economies.

Country Specific Methodology

View detailed information such as mode of interview, sampling design, margin of error, and design effect, for each country we survey.

Cross-national studies constitute the bulk of Pew Research Center’s international survey research. Such studies pose special challenges when it comes to ensuring the comparability of data across multiple languages, cultures and contexts. To learn more about the challenges and best practices of polling in foreign countries and in multiple languages, see here.

Pew Research Center staff are responsible for the overall design and execution of each cross-national survey project, including topical focus, questionnaire development, countries to be surveyed and sample design. The Center’s staff frequently contract with a coordinating vendor to identify local, reputable research organizations, which are hired to collaborate on all aspects of sample and questionnaire design, survey administration and data processing. Both coordinating vendors and local research organizations are consulted on matters of sampling, fieldwork logistics, data quality and weighting. In addition, Pew Research Center often seeks the advice of subject matter experts and experienced survey researchers regarding the design and content of its cross-national studies.

Field periods for cross-national studies vary by country, study complexity and mode of administration, typically ranging from four to eight weeks. To the degree possible, Pew Research Center attempts to synchronize fieldwork across countries in order to minimize the chance that major events or developments might interfere with the comparability of results.

Pew Research Center’s cross-national studies are designed to be nationally representative using probability-based methods and target the non-institutional adult population (18 and older) in each country. The Center strives for samples that cover as much of the adult population as possible, given logistical, security and other constraints. Coverage limitations are noted in the detailed methods for each country.

Sample sizes for Pew Research Center’s cross-national studies are usually designed to yield at least 1,000 interviews, though larger samples may be required for more robust within-country comparisons. Reported margins of error account for design effects due to clustering, stratification and weighting.

In the case of both telephone and face-to-face surveys, weighting procedures correct for unequal selection probabilities as well as adjust to key sociodemographic distributions – such as gender, age and education – to align as closely as possible with reliable, official population statistics. To learn about the weighting approach used for U.S. surveys using the nationally representative online American Trends Panel, visit here .

Pew Research Center is a charter member of the American Association of Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) Transparency Initiative .

INTERNATIONAL SURVEYS

Other research methods, sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Fresh data delivered Saturday mornings

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy